(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Interactive Classroom Television Systems : Educational Impact on Partially Sighted Students"

INTERACTIVE CLASSROOM TELEVISION SYSTEMS: 
EDUCATIONAL IMPACT ON PARTIALLY SIGHTED STUDENTS 



T. K. Bikson 
T. H. Bikson 
S. M. Genensky 



February 1978 



P-5933 



.BHS1 



V 51* 



3V q 



1 



c^ 



£-*-■ 




MX. MIGEL MEMORIAL LIBRARY 
American Foundation for the Blind 

15 West 16th Street, New York, New York 
10011 



The Rand Paper Series 



Papers are issued by The Rand Corporation as a service to its professional Staff. Their 
purpose is to facilitate the exchange of ideas among those who share the author's research 
interests; Papers are not reports prepared in fulfillment of Rand's contracts or grants. 
Views expressed in a Paper are the author's own, and are not necessarily shared by Rand 
or its research sponsors. 

The Rand Corporation 

Santa Monica, California 90406 



c. / 



-1- 



PREFACE AND SUMMARY 

An Interactive Classroom Television System (ICTS) is a way of 
creating a visual classroom environment for partially sighted students 
by making use of the magnification brightness and contrast capabilities 
of television cameras and monitors. More precisely, an ICTS is a 
multicamera, multimonitor closed circuit TV system with videotaping 
and videoreplay capacity. Such a system permits teachers and their 
partially sighted students to be in continuous two way visual communi- 
cation with one another. Moreover, it allows partially sighted 
students to function visually in classroom situations that are closely 
akin to those experienced by their fully sighted peers; that is, they 
can read ordinary printed matter, look at pictures, write with pen or 
pencil, do workbook problems, consult the blackboard, draw or paint. 
Thus the use of an ICTS both prepares students for eventual matricula- 
tion into classrooms for the fully sighted and provides an appropriate 
visual aid which enables students to make the fullest possible use of 
their residual vision. 

The Rand Corporation has carried on ICTS research since 1973. 
During this time, with funding provided by the Rehabilitation Services 
Administration (RSA grant 1U-P558U6/9) and the Bureau of Education for 
the Handicapped (OE contract 300-75-0123), under the direction of 
Dr. Samuel M. Genensky, Rand has designed and constructed two ICTSs 
and placed and evaluated them in two different visually handicapped 
classrooms in Los Angeles County. This paper describes the activities 



-2- 



undertaken to evaluate the educational impact of these ICTSs upon partially- 
sighted elementary students. Chapter I provides a description of the tvo 
ICTS sites and their participants. Chapter II "begins with a discussion 
of the evaluation design for the project,, the kinds of assessments employed, 
and the data collection schedule. It then presents the results of the first 
project year (1975-1976) in three areas of evaluation. Chapter III, building 
on Chapter II, describes changes introduced into the evaluation procedures, 
and then examines outcomes for the second project year (1976-1977). The 
Postscript considers the rationale for, and some of the issues that arise 

with disseminating the ICTS. 

In general, assessment of project outcomes over two years suggests 

that an ICTS has a strong positive impact on the educational experiences 
of partially sighted elementary school students in the three areas 
evaluated. With respect to academic achievement , examination of stan- 
dardized test scores showed significant improvement in reading and 
mathematics during "both years. However, the pattern of gains changed: 
in the first year, students improved more markedly in mathematics than 
in reading, scoring significantly higher in the former; but by the end 
of the second year, reading scores increased dramatically so that no 
substantial differences remained between the two achievement domains. 
We believe these results reflect the circumstance that, for visually 
impaired students, learning to perform computations is less difficult 
because it requires less scanning than does reading. A second year of 
ICTS experience enabled students to learn the visual scanning skills 
needed for advances in reading achievement. Two additional achievement 
results are noteworthy. First, for students similar in age, those who 
have had longer exposure to the ICTS score closer to grade normal on 



-3- 



achievement tests. Second, higher grade students are farther from 
grade normal than lower grade students. These outcomes lead us to 
believe that early exposure to an ICTS is helpful in minimizing the 
risk of cumulative educational deficit related to visual impairment. 

The project further undertook to evaluate two perceptual skills 
importantly involved in educational information processing for partially 
sighted students, visual motor integration and visual sequential memory . 
During the first project year, students showed significant gains in 
visual motor integration; visual sequential memory showed no such 
advance. In contrast, during the second year visual motor integration 
scores continued to improve but not dramatically; however, visual 
sequential memory evidenced significant gains. These results suggest 
that, as students initially learn to use the ICTS for academic tasks, 
their visual-motor coordination increases. But scanning via the X-Y 
platform is more difficult and, as we have hypothesized, requires a 
longer learning period. Thus visual sequential memory scores do not 
manifest significant positive change until the second year, during 
which reading (another scan-dependent activity) advances as well. 
These assumptions are supported by studying intercorrelations among 
achievement and perceptual skill scores. While visual sequential 
memory is associated with mathematics achievement, it is much more 
closely correlated with reading achievement. Thus the conclusions 
drawn from evaluation of achievement and of visually-dependent percep- 
tual skills are mutually corroborative. 

Finally, the project sought to assess the effect of the ICTS on 
psychosocial mediators of school success (attitudes toward academic 



_4- 



evaluation, attitudes toward peers, and self attitudes). The first 
year's data indicated no overall improvement on any measures of self 
or social constructs. While data from the second year showed substan- 
tial positive change on some important dimensions such as self esteem 
and peer affiliation, attitudes related to test performance evidenced 
no improvement even though students' test performance had improved 
remarkably. We believe the failure experiences accumulated by many 
handicapped students tends to generate negative self and social atti- 
tudes in the academic setting which are difficult to overcome. More 
generally, we believe that psychosocial mediators of school success 
in the partially sighted is an area well worth further investigation. 

In summary, the first two years of the demonstration project 
suggest that the ICTS has a strong and stable positive impact on the 
learning experiences of partially sighted elementary school students. 
Moreover, classroom observation data (reported elsewhere) indicate an 
extremely high level of on-task performance along with a sophisticated 
use of the ICTS as a tool, not a crutch. If the ICTS is as successful 
as it now appears, then we propose that the next step must be to promote 
the dissemination of ICTSs to other school districts. Most metropoli- 
tan areas with a population of at least 50,000 would, we believe, 
have a sufficient number of partially sighted children to justify the 
installation of such equipment. In this way, a large proportion of the 
severely visually impaired would be permitted to develop the capability 
for leading full educational, vocational, and social lives. 



-5- 



CHAPTER I 

INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH 

An ICTS, or Interactive Classroom Television System, is a way of 
creating a visual classroom environment for partially sighted students 
by making use of TV's magnification, contrast and brightness capabilities 
More precisely, an ICTS is a multicamera, multimonitor closed circuit 
TV system with videotaping and videoreplay capacity. The picture on 
the next page shows a 9-camera, 8-monitor system in an elementary 
school classroom. Such a system permits teachers and their partially 
sighted students to be in continuous visual communication with one 
another. Moreover, it allows partially sighted students to function 
visually in classroom situations that are closely akin to those experi- 
enced by their fully sighted peers; that is, they can read ordinary 
printed matter, look at pictures, write with pen or pencil, do workbook 
problems, consult the blackboard, draw or paint. Thus, use of an ICTS 
makes partially sighted students more aware of what is expected in 
classrooms for the fully sighted and, equally important, more aware of 
what they could be missing if they are placed in classrooms without 
appropriate visual aids. Behind the construction of the ICTS stands 
the philosophy that every person should have the opportunity to make the 
fullest possible use of residual vision in order to lead a maximally 
productive and satisfying life. 



-6- 




C/3 

H 



Pi 

o 

•H 



00 



-7- 



History 

In 1973, The Rand Corporation was engaged in research on "Information 
Transfer Problems of the Partially Sighted," funded by the Rehabilitation 
Services Administration (RSA grant 1U-P-558U6/9 ) , under the direction of 
Dr. Samuel M. Genensky. Early in that year Genensky sought RSA approval 
to construct and proof test an interactive classroom television system 
as part of that research project. Permission was granted by RSA, and 
our first ICTS was designed and constructed over the nine month period 
March - November 1973. That ICTS was installed in a classroom primarily 
for partially sighted children in the Madison Elementary School in 
Santa Monica, California in late November 1973. It has been in continuous 
operation in that setting since that fall. 

Construction and operation of the ICTS had been a technical success. 
However, systematic study of its educational implications was not a part of 
the RSA-sponsored research. Consequently, in 197*+ Genensky approached 
the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped (BEH) of the Office of Education; 
his goal was to ascertain whether that Bureau would be interested in sup- 
porting a research project aimed at determining how an ICTS helps in the 
teaching of basic skills to partially sighted elementary school children 
in classroom settings. BEH expressed interest in such a project, and 
in February 1975 a contract was signed by The Rand Corporation and by 
the Office of Education (Contract 300-75-0123). That contract called 
for the design and construction of a second generation ICTS to be 
installed in an elementary school classroom for partially sighted children; 
it also required an evaluation of the effect of that system as well as 
the first generation system on the learning experiences of partially 



■8- 



sighted students. The second generation ICTS was completed in November 
1975 and was immediately installed in the Killian Elementary School in 
Rowland Heights, California, where it has remained in continuous operation. 
At the termination of the project, educational evaluation data will 
represent approximately three academic years: 1975-1976 (although 
students at the first generation site had already had some ICTS experi- 
ence); 1976-1977; and 1977-1978, the final year. 

What is an ICTS? 

As we have said, an ICTS is a multicamera, multimonitor closed 
circuit TV system. The system consists primarily of N stations, a 
control console, a ceilingr-mounted room-viewing camera, and a videotape 
recorder. Below is a picture of a single station that has the following 
features: a down-pointing TV camera equipped with a 5-to-l zoom lens 
which in turn has close-up capability; a TV monitor mounted at eye level; 
a light source for illuminating reading and writing material; and an 
X-Y Platform, a moveable work surface that has margin stops in the x- 
or left-right direction and friction control in the y- or line-to-line 
direction. The X-Y Platform supports reading and writing materials 
below the down-pointing camera. In an ICTS classroom, N-l of the 
stations are for use by students and the Nth station normally is for 
use by the teacher(s); however, it is not unusual to see the teacher's 
station in use by a student . 

The control console for the classroom system is typically located 
at or near a teacher's desk. Both the first and second generation 
systems have control consoles which permit teachers to present on anv 



A system could have any number of stations, depending on the antici- 
pated number of students. Our first generation system has four stations, 
while the second generation system has eight. 



-9- 




An ICTS Student Station 



-10- 

one of the system's station monitors, independently of what is presented 
on any other monitor, (l) a full screen image of the output from any 
one of the system's cameras or from its videotape recorder; (2) a 
horizontally split image of the output from any two of these sources; 
or (3) a full screen superposition of the output from any two of these 
sources. With these system capabilities, for instance, partially 
sighted students can each work individually on their own materials or 
all read what the teacher is displaying from her desk; they can write 
solutions to arithemtic problems displayed on the board without having 
to recopy the problems themselves; and they can fill in the blanks 
on a superposed workbook page. In addition, the newer control console 
also permits the teachers to (k) present the same simple or composite 
image on all station monitors at one time via a special set of simple 
commands, or (5) allow each station's monitor to display a full screen 
image of the output from its own station camera via another set of 
simple commands. 

The system's room-viewing camera is mounted on the ceiling of the 
classroom and is run remotely. It can pan and tilt, and hence can bring 
virtually any part of the classroom within the view of its 10-to-l zoom 
lens. This enables students to look, for example, at the clock, at the 
calendar, at the blackboard, or at their teachers and classmates. Like 
all other cameras of an ICTS, the room-viewing camera can present both 
positive and negative images of what it sees. 

Last, the videotape recorder permits teachers to record information 
displayed on any of the system's station monitors, and to record lessons 
prepared by one or more teachers with the help of one or more of the 
system's N+l cameras. These materials can then be shown to one or more 



-11- 

students, or can "be shown and reviewed "by one or more of the teachers. 
Moreover, the videotape recorder can record off the air programs in 
black and white or in color; these videotaped programs can then he 
shown on a black and white or color TV receiver in the classroom that , 
in turn, can be viewed by one or several students at one time. The 
number of students who can do this at one time depends upon the level of 
vision of the participating students. A more detailed description of 

the first and second generation ICTS is available in two reports pub- 

7 
lished by The Rand Corporation (Genensky, S. M. , et al , 197^, Genensky, 

, 8 
S. M. , et al, 1977). 

Participating Students 

All students eligible to participate in the ICTS project are partially 
sighted. For definitional purposes, this means that the visual acuity in 

their better eye, even with the help of ordinary corrective lenses, does 

* ** 

not exceed 20/70 but is better than light perception or light projection. 

Participating students also must have IQs that lie roughly between 65 and 
130 and, although they may be multiple handicapped, their nonvisual handi- 
capping conditions must not seriously interfere with their successful 
use of the equipment at their ICTS stations. When students in the 
schools housing ICTS classrooms meet these criteria, and if their parents 



* 

A person with visual acuity in the better eye that does not exceed 

20/70 even with ordinary corrective lenses is unable to read newspaper 
column type with or without such lenses. 

Persons are said to have only "light perception" if, even with the help 
of ordinary corrective lenses, the vision in the better eye is such that they 
can only detect a light intensity when looking in a particular direction. 

Persons are said to have only "light projection" if, even with the help 
of ordinary corrective lenses, the vision in the better eye is such that they 
can visually detect very bright areas in a scene (especially those that are 
sources of illumination) , and if they can also detect opaque objects that cut 
off from his field of view all or part of the light from these bright areas 
in the scene. 



-12- 



and their teachers as well as members of the Rand project staff agree 
that they will benefit from an opportunity to participate, they are 
admitted as subjects in the BEH study. 

Classroom Settings 

The two ICTS classroom sites differ quite markedly with respect to 
physical setting, student population, and organization. The Madison site 
(housing the first generation system) consists of an l8-by-32 foot room 
with four ICTS stations, including the teacher's station. The equipment 
occupies approximately 50 percent of the room; the rest of the room 
contains student centers , with storage shelves along the perimeter and 
a carpeted open area in the center. 

For the first two years of the study (1975-1976 and 1976-1977), 
subjects at the Madison site numbered five and three, respectively; in 
spring 1976, one subject matriculated and another moved away from the 
school district. The age of the subjects ranges from six to eleven years, 
and the nominal grade level distribution represented includes first, 
third, fourth, fifth, and sixth. In addition to ICTS subjects, the 
classroom regularly serves one to three other handicapped students as 
well. Moreover, at any given time the population of the classroom 
varies considerably because students from an adjoining resource room make 
use of the visual handicap classroom during part of the day. 

There is one regular teacher in the classroom. She has participated 
in the ICTS study since its beginning. In addition, there is one regular 
aide, a mobility instructor for the functionally blind who makes daily 
visits, and a physical education instructor who visits the classroom 



•13- 



weekly. Finally, several adult tutors give varying amounts of time to 
the class during the school year. Overall, the average adult-student 
ratio is about one to three. 

This ICTS classroom is open from 8 : U5 to 11:30 for basic skill 
instruction. At 11:30 the students break for lunch, after which the 
partially sighted students attend regular classrooms appropriate to their 
grade level for such activities as music and art. 

The Killian site (where the second generation system is located) 
involves a 32 by 6U foot room with eight stations, including the teacher's. 
Although the classroom is much larger, the equipment occupies about 50 
percent of the available space as it does at the Madison site. The 
Killian classroom is fully carpeted, with the nonlCTS area being used 
for student centers and storage shelves . 

During the first year of the project, eight students participated 
in the ICTS study. During the second year this number grew to eleven, with 
six returning subjects and five new ones. The age of the subjects ranges 
from five to twelve years , and nominal grade levels range from prekinder- 
garten to fifth. As in the Madison classroom, this site also typically 
serves nonlCTS students and accommodates an occasional student from an 
adjoining resource room. 

Two regular teachers have been with this ICTS classroom since its 
inception. There are two regular aides and several student aides from 
the nearby junior and senior high schools as well. In addition, a 
mobility instructor and a speech therapist come to the classroom several 
times a week. The mean adult-student ratio is approximately one to two. 



-14- 



The Killian classroom is self contained, providing not only basic 
skills instruction but also a full range of learning experiences includ- 
ing physical education, art, and music. Subjects in the ICTS classroom 
do not, therefore, interact with normally sighted students during the 
regular class day. The classroom opens at 8:30, and students leave the 
room at staggered times. Prekindergarten and kindergarten students leave 
at noon, while grades 1 to 3 leave at 1:30 and grades k to 6 leave at 
2:30. 

This Paper 

This paper describes the activities undertaken to evaluate the 
educational impact of an ICTS on partially sighted students. Chapter II 
begins with a discussion of the evaluation design for the project, the 
kinds of assessments employed, and the data collection schedule. It then 
presents the results for the first project year (1975-1976) in each of 
the three major outcome areas investigated. Chapter III, building on 
Chapter II, describes changes introduced into the evaluation procedures 
and focuses attention on classes of effect deemed to be of special 
interest given the results already obtained. It then examines outcomes 
for the second project year (1976-1977). Taken together, the first two 
project years suggest that the ICTS has a strong and apparently stable 
positive impact on the learning experiences of partially sighted elementary 
school students. The Postscript discusses dissemination possibilities for 
the ICTS after the final year of the demonstration. 



-15- 

CHAPTER II 

The fundamental goal of the Interactive Classroom Television 
Systems project is to improve the educational experiences of partially 
sighted elementary school students. This goal has been implemented in 
two widely differing classroom sites: The first generation system is 
housed in a visually handicapped classroom serving a maximum of six students; 
the second generation system resides in a self-contained classroom for 
the visually handicapped and serves a maximum of lU students. Because the 
project is multifaceted, assessing the extent to which its objectives 
are being met requires collection of varied sorts of data tapping distinct 
areas of effect. Where it is feasible, the data are treated statisti- 
cally to determine significance of outcomes. Where such treatment is 
not feasible, project data nevertheless constitute rigorous documenta- 
tion of procedures and results appraisable on a case study basis. 
Both sorts of information are regarded as useful contributions to 
evaluation where the purpose of evaluation is assumed to be the sys- 
tematic reduction of uncertainty about program effects. 

For convenience, program outcomes for students are conceptualized 
in terms of four areas. Of primary importance is the impact of the ICTS 
on academic achievement in basic elementary school skills. Basic skills, 
for the purpose of this evaluation, have been restricted to verbal and 
quantitative proficiency as measured by standardized achievement tests. 
A second area of concern is the relationship of the ICTS to visually 
dependent perceptual-motor processes such as visual -motor integration 
and visual memory. For the partially sighted student making use of 
residual vision by means of an ICTS, these processes are important 



-16- 



mediators of information encoding and decoding and thus could have a 
substantial influence on learning. Next, the project is involved in 
examining what effect the ICTS has, if any, on self and social attitudes 
(for instance, self esteem and school affiliation) thought to be signifi- 
cant in students' school experiences. The final assessment domain, 
classroom behavior , seeks to determine the extent and organization of 
task-relevant activity when students make use of the ICTS. Task behav- 
ior is evaluated observationally. Because the classroom observation 
effort has been reported elsewhere (T. H. Bikson, 1977)-. it will not be 
discussed here. Rather, this discussion treats only the first three 
evaluation areas. Following a summary of the overall research design, 

outcomes from the first project year in these three areas are presented. 
(Second year outcomes are presented in Chapter III.) 

Evaluation Design 

The overall evaluation design for the present project is properly 
regarded as a "one-group pretest post test design" (Campbell and Stanley) 
1963) . Such a design, as it represents the current assessment activi- 
ties, can be systematized as follows (where X stands for the treatment, 
stands for observations, and subscripts represent occasions of 
observation) . 

, X 

pre/ post 

°1 °2 °3 °k ° 5 °6 °7 °8 ° 9 

The schema indicates that pre- and post-measures are obtained, supplemented 
by other observations collected repeatedly throughout the school year 
when the ICTS is in operation. While this evaluart ion design has many 
features of "quasi -experimental" methods, such as time-series experiments 



-17- 

k 
and recurrent institutional cycle designs (Campbell and Stanley, 1963), 

it is probably best classified as "pre-experimental." Because the use 
of a pre-experimental design raises serious methodological issues, these 
issues have been examined in some detail. 

What renders the design pre-experimental rather than experimental 
is that it is a one-group study; an experimental version of the same 
study would employ two groups , the treatment group and a nontreatment 
comparison group. The description of the subject population for the 
proposed study, however, should indicate why the use of a comparison 
group design is not feasible. Briefly, comparison subjects could not be 
selected randomly but would have to be chosen by matching along numerous 
dimensions (chronological age, IQ, visual acuity, other handicaps, and 
verbal and quantitative achievement levels) which do not naturally covary. 
If appropriately matching subjects could be located, their very unique- 
ness would render their usefulness as comparison subjects questionable. 
Further, use of such subjects would not provide a no-treatment compari- 
son population. Rather, these subjects would be drawn from the special 
education programs of various other schools; thus they would be recipi- 
ents of unspecified and diverse treatments involving different 
teachers, different curricular contents, and different time-management 
plans. Consequently, any outcome comparisons between ICTS students 
and the matching group would be problematic to interpret. Finally, 
establishment of such a comparison group would still not provide a 
large experimental sample from which to obtain statistically general- 
izable results (maximum n = ko) . A comparison group, then, would not 
contribute substantial information to the evaluation of the proposed 
project; it would make that evaluation experimental in name only. 



-18- 



Having looked at the reasons for choosing a one-group design, we 
then considered and weighed the potential threats to validity it involves, 
As Campbell and Stanley (1963) have noted, there are two classes of 
threats to validity given a one-group as opposed to a two-group design: 
history-maturation confounds, and testing-instrumentation confounds. 
The project minimizes threats to internal validity "by excluding sources 
of academic innovation in classroom sites other than the ICTS itself, 
and by attempting to insure that the history of the ICTS classroom is 
in no other respects atypic. On the other hand, visual impairment of 
subjects is regarded as posing a natural impediment to academic skills 
maturation, so that maturation is not a plausible rival hypothesis for 
explaining gains made with the ICTS in the present study. Both test 
reactivity and instrument decay, we think, are even less likely sources 
of systematic variation in outcomes given students' extensive preproject 
experience with test taking and our own efforts to hold circumstances 
of administration constant across occasions of testing. 

Finally, while regression artifacts often threaten internal validity 
for either a one- or a two-group design in a field intervention, they 
do not arise as an alternative explanation here for two reasons. 
First, the study does not rely on mean scores for subjects as a group, 
since they are performing at quite different age and ability levels. 
Second, individual scores cannot be compared with appropriate popula- 
tion means, since the latter have not been determined. It is expected 
that subjects' achievement scores will change in the direction of grade 
norms. Such changes cannot, however, be interpreted as statistical 
regression toward a true population mean since initial depressed scores 



-19- 

d.o not represent the extreme ends of a sampled normal distribution (therefore 
involving a greater proportion of sampling error) but rather the typical per- 
formance of a population of nonnormal subjects. Thus evaluation of subjects 
will focus on within-subject changes from one occasion of observation to the 
next, with consistent changes in the direction of grade-normal performance 
throughout the intervention being interpretable as performance gains rather 
than statistical artifacts. 

With the general evaluation design so understood, data collection efforts 
reflect the schedule presented below. 



. 

pre post 



Fall 1975 Spring 1976 

I (n = 5) I, (n = 5) 

a b 

II (n = 8) II (n = 8) 

a b 

1975-1976: n = 13 

Fall 1976 Spring 1977 

I a# (n = 0) I c (n = 13); 1^ (n = 0) 

II a * (n = 5) II C (n = 6); 11^ (n = 5) 

1976-1977: n = lk 

Fall 1977 Spring 1978 

V* (n = 1] X d (n = 2); X c* (n = 0); *b** (n = 1] 

H e « (» = 2) H d (n = 5); II C# (n - U); 11^, (n = 2) 

1977-1978: n = lk 

In this schedule, the Roman numerals I and II represent first- and second- 
generation sites; alphabetic subscripts indicate pre- and post-testing 
(a and b), with post test repetitions on a longitudinal basis (c and d) ; 
asterisks show entry of new subjects into the study, in some cases replacing 
students who exited from the demonstration class. There are some subjects for 



-20- 

whom three years of evaluation data will be available, and others who parti- 
cipated in the project for only one or two years. The data presented below 
represent the first and second years of the demonstration, academic years 
1975-1976 and 1976-1977. Because the measures are treated on a within- 
subject 'and within-year basis, scores from newly entering subjects are com- 
bined with those of continuing subjects for the second year analysis and 
discussion. 

Academic Achievement 

As we noted above, the first evaluation objective is to assess the 
effect of the ICTS on academic achievement in basic skill areas (verbal 
and quantitative achievement). For this purpose, standardized achievement 
tests are administered to all subjects on a pre-post basis. Subjects 
who are performing at the first grade level or above receive the Compre- 
hensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS) reading and mathematics subtests 
(from National Testing Service; v. reviews in Buros, 1972). For students 

performing at preacademic levels, a subset of the CIRCUS battery (CIRCUS 

1, 2, 5, 8) is administered (from Educational Testing Service; v. review 

7 
in Proceedings of the American Psychological Association , 1973). 

Scores from the 1975-1976 administration of the CTBS are presented in 

Table 1 below, which is organized along the following lines. Subject numbers 

are given first, along with information about the subject's chronological age 

and "normal" grade at post test time (May 1976). While visually impaired 

students are not expected to perform at the level indicated by the norms 

derived from regularly sighted students, these figures provide a basis 

for interpreting obtained scores and estimating school year progress. 

Data for reading and mathematics are then given, in this order: the post 

test score is represented in terms of its grade equivalent and is followed 

by a number in parentheses representing the difference between the obtained 



-21- 

score and the grade normal score for the subject; next the pretest 
score is given, in grade equivalent terms; and finally, the pre-to-post 
test change is displayed in terms of gains or losses in grade equiva- 
lents. The last column subtracts the mathematics score from the reading 
score, to establish whether subjects tend to achieve at systematically 
higher or lower levels in either skill area (a minus indicates superior 
performance in mathematics, while a plus shows relative superiority in 
reading) . 

The five subjects in the 100 series are Madison subjects, while 
subjects in the 200 series are Killian students. It should be noted 
that the pretest score for subject 205 is theoretical. This student 
bottomed out on the CTBS in the fall , but needed a first grade level 
test in the spring. Consequently, for data analysis purposes he was 
awarded a pretest score of 1.0, interpreted as very beginning first grade. 
The total number of subjects for whom CTBS data are available, then, is 
eight. Unless otherwise specified, statistical treatments are non- 
parametric and rely only on ordinal properties of the data. 

Examining the pre-to-post changes was our primary interest. For 
this purpose, we employed a Wilcoxen matched-pairs signed-ranks test. 
In both reading (T = U.5, p_< .05) and mathematics (T = 3, £ < .025), 
students' scores showed significant gains. Looking at post test scores, 
it is our view that by the end of the first year, students were per- 
forming acceptably near grade normal on the whole. There is a tendency 
for Site I subjects to be closer to grade normal at post test time in 
both skill areas , although the between-group difference does not reach 
statistical significance as assessed by a Mann-Whitney U test. This 
result is not surprising in view of the fact that the Madison classroom 



-22- 



TABLE 1 





Age 
5/76 


Normal 
Grade 


Post test 

score n 
(distance ;-j 
from grade w 
normal) g 


Pre test 5 
score 


Pre-Post 
change 


Post test 

score h 
(distance in 
from grade 2 
normal) H 


[EMATIC 

4J 
CO 

CD <U 
4-» U 

o 

CD O 
U CO 

P4 


Pre-Post 
change 


POST TEST 


READING - 


MATHEMATICS 




M 
A 
D 
I 
S 


101 


11-7 


6.9 


5.4 (-1.5) 


4.6 


+ .8 


4.9 (-2.0) 


5.2 


-0.3 


+ .5 


102 


11-3 


5.9 


1.8 (-4.4) 


1.5 


+ .3 


3-7 (-2.2) 


2,9 


+0.8 


-1.1 


103 


9-2 


3.9 


3.3 (-0.6) 


3.6 


-.3 


4.0 (+0.1) 


3.8 


+0.2 


-.7 




N 


104 


9-10 


4.9 


5.2 (+0.3) 


5.8 


-.6 


5.9 (+1.0) 


4.4 


+1.5 


-.7 




105 


6-8 


1.9 


1.5 (-0.4) 


0.6 


+ .9 


2.1 (+0.2) 


0.5 


+1.6 


-.6 


K 
I 

L 
L 
I 
A 

N 


201 


8-6 


3.9 


3.0 (-0.9) 


2.3 


+ .7 


2.5 (-1.4) 


2.5 


+0 


+ .5 


203 


12-4 


6.9 


3.1 (-3.8) 


2.3 


+ .8 


3.3 (-3.6) 


3.2 


+0.1 


-.2 


205 


6-7 


1.9 


1.8 (-0.1) 


1.0* 


+ .8 


2.7 (+0.8) 


1.0* 


+1.7 


-.9 


210 


11-9 


6.9 


2.3 (-4.6) 


2.3 


+0 


3.6 (-3.3) 


1.6 


+2.0 


-1.3 



*Theoretical beginning first grade score; 
this student bottomed out on the Fall CTBS. 



-23- 



had had the ICTS a year longer than the Killian classroom. (As we shall 
see later, reading and mathematics achievement are both highly correlated 
with visually dependent skills ; and the latter should be enhanced by 
ICTS use.) There is a similar tendency for students nominally in grades 
four through six to be farther from grade normal than students in grades 
one through three (U = h, p < .10). This result reflects the cumulative 
aspect of educational deficits and suggests that it is important for 
partially sighted students to have access to an ICTS early in their 
school experience. Finally, the last column in Table 1 shows the rela- 
tionship between reading and mathematics scores. This relationship was 
examined by means of a Wilcoxen T test, which indicated that ICTS students 
are significantly closer to grade normal in mathematics than in reading 
(t = 5, p < .05). We found this relationship to hold true of pretest 
scores as well despite the high correlation between mathematics and 
reading achievement. We believe that the relative superiority of these 
subjects in mathematics is accounted for by the fact that performing 
computations requires less scanning than does reading. 

Information from the fall and spring administration of the CIRCUS 
battery to younger subjects in the Killian classroom is presented in 
detail in Tables 2A and 2B and summarized in Table 2. The CIRCUS battery 
chosen for evaluating preacademic levels of basic skills in students 
{the kindergarten and prekindergarten level) includes two "verbal" or 
pre-reading tests (CIRCUS 1 and 8) and two "quantitative" or pre- 
mathematical tests (CIRCUS 2 and 5). Table 2 gives total pre and post 
test scores for each subject in both skill areas, along with the pre-to- 
post change. Wilcoxen matched-pairs signed ranks tests indicated that 
subjects improved significantly on both verbal (T = 0, p < .005) and 



-24- 



TABLE 2 



KILLIAN SUBJECTS 
SUMMARY OF CIRCUS ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES 







TOTAL 


VERBAL 


TOTAL 


QUANTITATIVE 




Post 
Test 


Pre 
Test 


Pre-Post 
Change 


Post 
Test 


Pre Pre-Post 
Test Change 


204 


14 
15 


12 
12 


+2 
+3 


8 
22 


10 - 2 
13 +9 


206 


28 
22 


19 

15 


+9 
+7 


12 
28 


4 +8 
22 +6 


207 


18 
20 


16 
16 


+2 
+4 


18 
36 


18 ±0 
23 +13 


208 


23 
14 


18 
9 


+5 
+5 


12 
28 


9 +3 
20 +8 



-25- 



quantitative (T = 2, p < .01) assessments. No comparison can be drawn 
between outcomes in the two basic skill areas, however, since scores 
do not map on to a common grade equivalent scale (all these tests being 
normed below first grade level) . 

Because there is such a small number of subjects at the preacademic 
level in the Killian classroom, and because their achievement cannot be 
compared either with grade norms or with the performance of other 
subjects (since all Madison subjects are older), we have chosen to pre- 
sent a detailed descriptive account of their test performance rather 
than attempt any statistical analyses. Table 2A breaks down the two 
verbal achievement tests into their components in the following fashion. 
After the subject identification number, chronological age and grade 
placement, information is tabled in; exactly the same manner for CIRCUS 1 
( What Words Mean ) and CIRCUS 8 ( How Words Work ) . Initially, the total 
pretest score is given, followed by the percentile rank of that score in 
relation to national kindergarten percentile norms. The next two 
columns give the total post test score and its percentile rank. Succeed- 
ing columns then present, for each of the three subparts of the test, 
the pretest score and post test score and their respective percentile 
ranks. The latter sort of information allows determination of precisely 
the areas in which students' verbal achievement is strong or weak. 
Finally, an interpretation of the configuration of obtained scores is 
derived from the test manual and reproduced below the student's outcome 
array. The comment above the dotted line refers to the pretest configu- 
ration, while the comment below the line describes the post test display. 



Percentile rank indicates the percent of kindergarteners in the 
national sample who scored below the range in which the subject s obtained 
score fell. 



-26- 



oo 

H 
GO. 
W 
H 





rH 

u 

< 

3 



> 



c 

en 

M 

I 

o 
u 



o 
u 

en 

ui 

O 

H 
U 

H 

O 
o, 

W 

Cm 







SENTENCE RETORTS 
gre 
post 




** 
00 

3 

a. 


}-i 

QJ 


• i 




co oo 

4J 

O C/J 

QJ £> 
Cu CJ 
CO Pi 

rr} i_j 


-r-l 
3 
O 
O 

oo 
3 

Cu 
J1L 


. rl 

OJ 

4-1 








^sod-% 


cm 






o 

•H 


oo 

CM 


M Ol 
CUMH 


3 
1) 


>> 3 

4-1 0) 
rH 1 1 


CM 


Ul 
rH 1 
rH t~J 


v-i 
Cu 


V4 r4 

4-1 O 


oo -1 

CM 00 0)1 
3 '11 


XBrjuXg 


r^ 


r3 -1 
4-1 0)1 

•H nl 


00 

a 

•H 


o x> 

3 V-i 


vO 


00 ^Q 

3 M 
.J ni 


QJ 

J-I 


3 QJ 

O MH 

.r-l li-i 


r^ 


3 rQI 

3 Til 


OO 
3 


y rQ 


iH -HI 

-<r ex 4JI 


9ad-% 


oo 

CM 


S -HI 
Q) 4J| 
t> >s ()I 


> 

rH 


4-) > 

co 
3 3 


00 


> > 

rH 

n t-1 


QJ 


MH iH 
M-l T3 

.rJ 


oo 

CM 


•iH QJI 

col 

(11 rn| 


> 

rH 


QJ 0) 

H > 

ni 


00 O 31 
CM <U V-I 

.> >> ni 




xb^u/^s 


m 


•H 4J 3 1 

4JH ^| 
a, o o.i 


> rC 

3 4-» 
•■H t-1 


•H a) 
a) 


CO 


> 3 

3 cd 
•~ 1 


3 

o 

•r-l 


-3 ,3 

4-1 
T3 >rH 


<r 


CJ QJI 

•H CO 1 
•U 101 


> 

3 


MH QJ 
irl OJ 


•H 4JVI 

in ii h •( 

~ LT| 0) O COI 

co o iH 31 

,3 UJ tII 


rjsod-% 


n 


0) O 1 

O -H 13 1 

qj u-i 3i 


5 

CO 

B m 


a> 4-) 
,3 a) 


m 


3 M 


4-1 

cd 


cd ^ 

r 


m 


O 31 
3 1 

l, Cll 1 


CO 

-0- 


TJ [i 

4J 


CIRCUS 8: How Words Work 




sjo^Bjado 


U~l 


M m cdl 

■H 1 

ri it cm 


a) oj 

4-1 O 

"H ri 


3 3 


oo 


(U 3 
._! rn 


,m 


4J QJ 
3 O 

a r 


00 


Cu 001 
31 

Tl -1 | 


OJ 

4-1 

«4. 


•tl -° 
£ oo 


U MH 1 

m ft hi 

3-33— 4> l- 


4-1 

3 
ot . 


ajd-% 




•H Ol 
Tj -HI 

(l) crt i_i l 


0) 
4-1 4-> 

co ri 


•H 
CO 4J 


in 


4J ,3 
rn i 1 


!H 
O 

tn 


QJ 

• « 4J 

- 3 


in 

CO 


3 oa 

3 31 
31 


4-1 


3 
CO -H 

01 . ,'j 


u~) -rH r3| 
CO Tj 4J| 

.... (U 3 )j| 


sao^Bjado 


<? 


a^ ol 
C 31 

CI) J-i )-i I 


o a) 
6 co 


<U 3 -r-l 

a) -h pj 

n fl n 


r^- 


O -H 


•H 


i-l QJ 

3 co 
n 


vO 


3 rHl 
O 1 

.rJ —II 


o 




o cd 
£ 3 

(11 .,_! 


O r3 31 
CM 3 MhI 
,. OJ l. 1 


a .. 


rjsod-% 


CM 


4-1 -Ml 

a) col 
p. « (-i 1 


o 3 
4J a) 


•rH O 
rn r l 


oo 


o ^ 

4-1 I-l 

n 


3 
•H 


O 3 

^ QJ 
- ni 


CM 

CO 


4J 31 

O 31 

. n oi 


o 

4J 


3 -H 


CM 4J O COI 
CO 3 TJ| 

. Cu - QJI 


o 

4-1 


suijoj[ qj9A 


ro 


e oj -hi 

O 00 1 


r^ S 

rH 4J 

4 i ni 


0) CO OC 
!-i -rl 0) 

-i h-i (-; 


oo 


rH 
i i ni 


4-1 

3 

m 


00 S 

0) 4-1 

3 Q 1 


m 


r-l "HI 

4-1 4-l| 

rr l '11 


>> 

r-i 


CO U 
CO 

in -, i 


S 3 an 
m o -oo 31 

. O 3 r- 


CO 
OJ ■ 

~u — 


aad-% 


CM 

CO 


3 tji 
^i m ail 

C) C Cl)l 


O ,0 

a) 


4-1 "^. 

O 3 • 
-1 h P^ 


CM 

CO 


O 1-4 

QJ O 
li R 


4J 

p 


Pi hn 


CM 
CO 


3 31 
•H 31 

LU.I- 


o 

QJ 
-P- 


3 TJ 
•rl 
-?>■■ t- 


cm 3 -H 

CO rii 00 COI 

. - o 3 ,*:> 


OJ 

-+4— 


sniJOji qaaA 


CO 


3 3 31 

rH rH 1 


M O 
O -H 


>-i 0) 
4-1 0) Sh 
rn ri p 


m 


U 

O CO 


S 
o 


QJ 3 
>H -H 

n. ii 


MO 


U 1 

QJ 31 

3 M 


rJ 

o 

..- >- 


rH {j 

O rH 
-r>- rt 


3 3 r»l 

CM H rH 31 
4J4- 


-r»* 


3Sod-% 


rH 


O H CO 1 

4-i n) a:i 

cl to. 1 


cd 
•3 3 

CL) -r) 


•H 
4J Ut) 
c! f 1 C! 


ON 
CO 


0) 
TJ CU 
ni rl 


cd co 
>^-d 3 cu 


rH 


4J -HI 
V-i 4JI 

3 nJ 


TJ 

_a.L 


3 3 

•H -H 

T- 't-| 


O rH 1 

rH 4J 3 4-)l 

a [01 


o 

CM 


^sod-XB^oi 


H 


co o 3 1 

U -H 4-) I 


TJ 

3 -H 


a) cd cd 
S-i u 
rl) p, rn 


CM 

CM 


T3 

3 ••> 
<-> 


rH 

cd 

I . ! i 


cd B 3 

•H -U 

rn ) | rl 


o 

CM 


MH QJI 
Ol 


3 
-Q- 


QJ 4-1 

CO -H 

-Q «ri 


<f CO O QJ| 

H rl -H 4J| 
cd— (j J_ 


a 




3Xd-% 


O 


cu o 4J| 

Cu 3 C0| 

Q. 3 0)1 


Cu O 
CO CO 
ID -rH 


MH ' S 
14H r3 fH 

•rH C n 


rH 


3. t-1 

CO 3 
ni n 


QJ 

3 

ni 


B O 3 
rH W r-l 

p .-1 | 1 


ON 


Tj >-ll 

QJ 1 

ni U_l| 


Cu ,3 

CO 4J TJ 

I 1 - 


0) CJ J3| 3 

o a □ ul fl 

_ — Q. 3 -HI 3 


aad-XB^oi 


CM 

rH 


<| MH 4JI 


Od T3 


T3 CO MH 


m 

rH 


Pi O 


1 O 


MH Tj CO 


MO 

H 


r3 Ol 


Pi 


^ r3 


ON < MH 31 


00 


, 






ni 






; 


}Sod-% 


Pi i 

CO 


CM 
CO 


> 

•H 
J-J 


1 

1 
1 




CM j 


. — \ 


^sod-saaxgxpo^ 


1 
CM 


m 


3, 3 

a) o 

CJ -H 


1 
1 
1 


>> 

H 


i 


1 

CO 1 

■ 1 


3jd-% 


CM 

CO 


1 
1 

CU 1 






CM 
CO 


CU 4J 
M CJ 

, 3 


1 
1 
1 


cfl . 

rH CO 

3 3 


CM ! 

CO 


c-^ 1 

CO 1 

.. \ 


aad-saaTixpow 


CO 


> ! 

•H 1 
4-> 3 | 






CO 


QJ H 
& 4J 
4J CO 


1 

I 
I 


rQ 3 
3 O 
O 3 


1 

CM 1 
1 


1 
cm ! 

, 1 


3Sod-% 


OO 
CO 


Cu 1 

0) -rH 1 
O 4-> 1 






CM 


3 
CM -H 
O 


1 
1 
I 


O 

> r3 

4-1 


oo 

m ! 


oo 

CO 1 

- 1 


^sod-sqjeA 


<r 


aJ o 1 
V-i 3 1 

u 1 






o 

rH 


CU 
M U 
QJ Q 


1 
1 
1 


QJ -H 
> S 

•H 


m 


1 
1 
1 , 






1 

00 1 

. 1 , 


3 

ca 

co 

T3 

o 

3: 

4-1 

3 

rCi 

r-l 

C/0 

CJ 
Pi 

H 
O 




ajd-% 


oo 

CO 


3 Jj 1 

•H CO 1 
<H 1 






00 
00 


■i u 

3 co 


1 

1 
1 


4-1 3« 
Cu <-\ 

QJ QJ 


CO 
CO 


1 4J 

4J| 3 

. CI ..« 






00 1 4J 
CO 4-1 | 3 




ajd-sqaaA 


CO 


a) -3 1 

O 1 

d co 1 






vO 


3 -3 

QJ 
crt QJ 


1 

1 
i 


O r3 

U rH 


CM 


3i § 
ll ° 






3 I g 

cm a i a 

...El 


3Sod-% 


CO 


5) -3 1 

tj QJ i 

•H <U 






m 

CO 


a 

o 

4J 4-J 


1 
1 
1 


3 
3 3 
■H O 


m 

CO 


51 o 

Ol 

1 4J 






in o i o 

CO O 1 
■ . 1 4 J 


^sod-suno^ 


co 


■14H C 1 

3 1 
o •« 






CO 

rH 


3 

rH 


1 
1 

1 


•rH 
•U 4-1 

f-i -H 


oo 


4-1 1 CO 
COt 3 

. Oil . 4J 






4J I CO 

r^ co i 3 
01 1 u 


aad-% 


m 

CO 


CJ CO 1 

rH 1 

.V rH 1 






LO 

CO 


4-1 " 
O CO 
0) P 


I 
1 
1 


QJ T3 
4-1 ^3 
(1) ol 


m 

CO 


4-l| 

1 4J 

01J__L0. 






m 4-i t 

CO 4-J 

01 1 rn 




Bad-sunoN 


mo 


O -rl 1 
CO ^ •! 

rH CO Oil 






o 

rH 


l-i QJ 
}J 4-) 

O -rl 


1 
•1 
(111 


Cu 
B CO 

O Tl 


CM 
rH 


u\ o 

Cul Cu 
1 






CM u \ o 

H ftl p, 

1 


}Sod-% 


CM 


O >-.-H| 

4-1 S-| J-H 






o 

CM 


o 

>N 

■rl u 


Ol 
•HI 

■HI 


O QJ 
CJ 


CM 


vOI M3 
O 1 O 
CMI CM 






rH MO | «X> 

rH O | O 

CM 1 CM 


3Sod--[B^ox 


r-l 


TO Ol 
CO rH Cdl 

H 3 V-i 1 


1 




oo 

CM 


33 c3 

-3 rH 

3 a 


edi 
HI 


rH 

rH •« 

cd co 


oo 


1 
COI CO 

edi cd 






2 to ! co 

<^ Cd 1 cd 


aad-% 


O 


CO rQ CM 

a) cd i 
a. o tJ i 


d) 

S 

CO 




CM 


O JD 
CU 3 
CO o 


Cul 

1 

T3I 


r-l rH 
QJ rH 

3 -H 


o 


1 

oj i cu 

Bl B 






1 

CM 3 I 0) 

a i a 




ajd-XB^ox 


CM 

rH 


u. o u i 
<3 > edi 


cj ■ ■" 
1 




ON 


01 u 
Pu > 


31 
cdl 


CU r!<S 

O CO 


MO 
rH 


CO 1 CO 
C/)| GO 






00 CO I CO 





3pt?a3 x Braao N 


U 


i4 


r^ 

Cu 


u. 


aSy 


MO 


m 


-* 


m 




3 03l.qn5 


O 

CM 








o 

CM 


o 

CM 


oo 
o 

CM 



CO 
H 
en 
W 
H 

H 

W 

> 

w 

M 

< 
> 

M 
H 
< 






CO 

z 

o 

CO 



o 
u 

w 
PS 

o 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 

Pi 

M 

H 

CO 

o 

Pm 

w 
Pi 
Pn 



CO 

H 
U 
W 

« 

CO 



.J 
►J 

M 



PQ 
CM 

W 
►J 

9 















" 


-27- 
























SENTENCE 
REPORTS 


£re 
post 
















:jsod-% 


i 

On 1 
00 1 

1 


ON 1 

00 1 


cr> l 
00 l 


ON 1 

00 






s^aoouoo 
paaaqtun^ 


00 


TJ 

(0 


i 
i 
i 

i 




CT> 


1 cu 

1 > 

1 -H 

1 4-1 


60 
C 
•H 


CM 

rH 




C 

cO 




00 


> 00 

•H C 
U -H 








ajd-% 


o> 

CO 


)-l 
o 

CO 


1 TJ 
1 C 
1 CO .C 

1 4J 




o-> 

00 


aJ 1 co 

4-1 1 4-1 

t ! u 


c 

3 
O 


ON 
CO 




CO 
rH 
rH 


00 

c 

•H 


ON 1 
00 


4J C 

•H 3 
4J O 






s^aaouoo 
pajaqmriN 


m 


ffl TJ ■ 

CJ 0) 
C CD 

CD C 


1 w «H 
I .H 3 

1 rH 

i -h a, 




00 


1 'vJ 
CD 1 CO 
O 1 3 

•h 1 cr 


u 

XI 

4-1 


ON 




•rl 

CO 


4- 
O 
CO 

S 


00 






o 

PC 

< 
o 

& 

o 
pa 

CM 

CO 
C_> 

pi 

M 




3Sod-% 


ON 
<N 


4-J 

CD ••> 

p. CO 


1 ^ ^H 
1 CO CD 

1 rC 




ON 
CM 


4J 1 

O 1 CD 

CO 1 rC 


•H 

3 


rH 


vOl 
Ol 


cD 
> 

•H 


a 


rH 1 

r— 


CD 3 

,C 




SUOJ}BX3H 


CO 


5 ^ 
O CO 

cj co 


1 CD 

1 > rH 

•h eg 




rH 
rH 


M 1 4J 
CX 1 

1 <+-! 


rH 
CD 


CM 

rH 


cM t 

<4-l 1 


•u 
cO 

4J 


4J 

CD C 


CM 1 

rH 1 


rH 

IH CD 




aad-% 


ON 

CM 


4-1 
CD 

> -u 


1 4J B 

co o 

1 4-1 t4 




ON 

CM 


*o 1 
c 1 

CO 1 Pn 


rH 


ON 
CM 


CJI 

4-1 1 


•H 

4-1 

C 




ON 

CM 


ul 
CI 


CJ J-. 
>>rH 




SUOT^EXS'a 


CO 


4-1 CD 

rt 4-i 


" 1 t4 4-J ' 
1 4J -H 

1 c 3 




CJN 


1 c 
C 1 cO 

1 e 


(0 

c 



00 


CDI 

Si 


i0 
3 
cr 


i0 

B rH 
CD 


r- 




eg C 
B O 




rjsod-^ 




•H X 

4-1 U 


1 CO ^cJ 
1 3 CO 

i cr 




•<r 

CO 


•H 1 

4-1 -1 O 

O COl 4J 


•H 
4-J 

•H • 




CD 1 
4-1 1 

COI 


C 

•H 


4-i ? 

O CD 
CD Tj 


co 


u 1 
Ol 


O 4-1 
4J -H 




SuT^unoo 


rH 
H 


"fl M-r 

CO 3 

3 


• 05 
Ol CO) 




00 


3 4J| 13 in 
M cu >,-a 

4J CDI rH CO M 


CM 

rH 


■"Ul 
COI 


4-1 
C 


3 O 


00 


4-J 1 

col 

CDI 


'0 
>nTJ 
rH CO 




ajd-% 


co 


G 


•HI 5) CD 
4JI 4-1 C 
Ol CD 


CO 


co 


W Ul 4-1 

C CI O 
•HOI CD 


CD 
CO 4-1 


CO 


4-> 1 

col 

CDI 


4-1 
CD 


C/J 

rH 
CD 


CO 


1 1 
CD 


4-J 

O CO 

CD TJ 




SuTtjunoQ 


m 


c3 a 

CO o 
iH a 


Ml B 60 

4-Jl O C 


CD 


m 


Ul U 
M 1 M 

CD CDI O 


CD rH 
CD CO 

c c 


vO 


4-1 1 
1 1 
4-J 1 


UU 

B 
O 


60 CD 
C rH 


m 


H 1 

UU 


M CD 
O C 




asod-% 


o 

rH 


o ^ 

4-1 4-1 


MI -rH " 
CI TJ 
•HI >. C 


rH 

CO 


cx> 

CM 


X >l O 
4-1 -HI 
M 4J 1 t3 




4-1 -H 
3 4-1 


rH 

vO 


w 1 
01 

CJ 





'r-l 
Tj CO 

c c 


ON 
CM 




CM 


O 
4-1 

TJ 3 




3Sod-xi?30x 


CM 
CM 


r-i 

co 3 
M o 


I H cd 
Ml H 4J 
CDI cO co 


c 



•H 


00 

CM 


3 ttj 1 CD 

<4-4 4-1 1 Tj 

•HI C 


^ CO 

rH 

•. CD 


vO 

CO 


col 

cOl 


r— 1 
rH 

CO 


CO u 
4-1 -H 
CO 4J 


00 

CM 


CO 

CO 


"8 « 




ajd-% 


O 


"cil '-H 
CD U-i 

cu iw 


4:1 .'M W" 

4-1 | CD CD 
Ml C -O 


CO 

rH 




rH 


CO 4-1 1 O 
13 CI Cm 
CD COI CO 


"W M 
§ T3 




rH 


CDI 
El 


M 
CD 
C 


M cd 
CD M 
TJ CD 


CO 


CD 

B 


P. s 

CO CD 






9jd-XB30X 


CO 

rH 


■"CX'-H" 
<J TJ 


31 tD C 
chI O 3 


0) 
M 


CM 
CM 


■CD ^) 1 U) 

Z cri pi 


4-1 U 
•H CO 


CO 
CM 


CO 1 
COI 


vD 
O 


l-i uu 
3 O 

3 




CM 


CO 


Pi -H 




















}sod-% 


O 


CD 






O 

CO 


c 1 
1 




1 
r>. 1 









sjaqrariN 


CO 


CO 
O 






CM 


l H 

4-1 1 

O 1 


rH ,C 


-J- 


CO 






« 


rC3 
1 CO 4-1 




aad-% 


O 

CO 


M 

CD rC 


1 on 
1 C 
1 tH 




O 

co 


"OU 3 1 
C M 1 

•H 4-1 1 


CO 4J 
4-1 -H 
•H St 





H 

CD 
4-> 









1 cd 3 

1 4-1 




saaqran^ 


CM 


12 4-1 

O -H 

rH 5 


1 IN 

1 -H 

1 C 




rH 


N CO 1 
•H C 1 
C -H 1 


co a. 

CJ rH 


in 


4J 
CD 

rH 






sf 


1 <U iH 

1 iH a) 




to 

Pi 
w 

CO 

a 

CO 

Pi 
W 
H 
H 
W 
►J 

• • 

m 

CO 

B 

pi 

HH 
CJ 




3Sod-% 


CO 
CO 


60 Ou- 


1 tsu w 

1 O CD 
1 CJ ,C 




CO 
CO 


01) 1 
O M 1 

CJ CD 1 


60 x: 
c 




60 

c 






NO 


1 A- 

1 60 
1 C rH 




9SB0 aawox 


rH 


"•H 0) 
N ,C 
•H 


■ I ' U3 "4-1 

1 M U 

3 




CO 


CD Xi 1 

■M 4-1 1 

M 1 


l H rH 
N CO • 

•H C CO 


m 


•t-1 
N 
•H 






<r 


1 N C 
1 «H O 




ajd-% 




60 CO 

o c 


I C U-i 
•1 -H 

C0| CO 




CO 
CO 


l-i iJ 1 
•H MH 1 


U U H 
60 -H CD 
O 4-1 J2 




1-1 
60 
O 




4-1 

C 


CO 
CO 


4J 

c 


1 i-i "H 
1 60 4-1 
1 O «H 




9SB0 J3MOX 


sa- 


u u 

CD -H 

M 4-1 


Ml CD 'O 1 
CDI O CD 
431 C CD 


• 

CD 


rH 


CD 0) ' 1 
O TJ 1 
C CD 1 


U -H S 
CD 13 3 
M 'O C 


m 


U 

CD 
M 




CD 


rH 




1 CD TJ 
1 M CO 




rjsod-% 


ON 
CO 


•H 
C TJ 
•H TJ 


"HI CD « 
3l 4-1 
CI CD 


V 
•H 
4-1 


rH 


-CD CD T 
4J C 1 

CD 1 


CO 

C T3 
•H TJ C 


rH 

^o 


C 

•H 




O 


rH 
vO 







1 C CO 
I 'H Tj 




sxBajdBO 


<r 


'■■ (Q 
4-1 

C co 


I P* • 

•01 e 01 

CI O M 


"O 

CO 
M 


r~- 


S co 1 
O M 1 


CD "CO 
4-1 CD 
C C co 


ON 


4-1 

C 




4-1 

CO 
CD 


m 


4-1 
CO 

CD 


I 4-1 CD 

1 c c 




aad-,% 


on 

CO 


— CD »c5 
4-) CD 
CD CD 


■«J| "CJ -O)" 
1 £> 

cm ^ e 




CO 


■CJ CD 1 


CD M 
4J >^ CD 
CD CO 4-1 


rH 


CD 
4-» 
CD 




4-1 

CD 


CO 


CD 


1 V 

1 4-1 4-1 • 
I CD 3 CO 




SXB3XdBQ 


-a- 


-PVR 



O 4-> 


"Ml U 3 

CDI CO C 

4-)| rH 


■c 

CO 


CM 


■U 3 ' - 1 

CO C •! 
rH CDI 


U, B 4-1 
B CD 
O 4-1 rH 


00 


B 
O 


.1 


H 


<!• 


M 
P. 


1 Dj Xi M 
1 O » 4J 




}sod-% 


rH 


3 

>N 


4-»I t5 
CDI O C 
rH| 4J CO 


u 


•H 


ON 
rH 


T3 Ul 
O C -HI 

4-1 CO 4J| 


U 3 

Xi CD 
>. CO 


CO 

m 




Ml 

CDI 


l*» 

O 
CM 


ON 

rH 


O 

CM 


I M CD 

1 t^ CD rH 




3Sod-xB30X 


CO 


— iH * 

rH CO 

CO M 


rH| CO CO 

COI MM 


•U 

a 

3 


CM 

rH 


1 

CO CO COI 
M M Ml 


rH "10 
rH CO CJ 
CO M 


00 

rH 


rH 
rH 

CO 


HI 

31 


CO 

cO 


CM 

rH 


CO 

cO 


1 r™l J-J 

1 rH B H 

1 cO 3 CO 




aad-% 


on 

rH 


m u " cu 

CD 4-> 

C 4J 


"iJi TO 'V) 
•HI CD 4J 
OJ Cu 4J 


M 
CO 


rH 


TO CD 04 
CD -Ul 1 

a, 4-1 T3i 


M CD M 
CD 4-1 CD 
C 4J 3 


co 
m 


M 
CD 
C 


Ul 

TJI 


CD 
B 


rH 


CD 
B 


I M C f 
1 CD -H 
1 C TJ D- 






aad-xB^ox 


o 

rH 


■ a; a; 


co 1 uu ai 

Ol •< rH 


u 

•H 


** 


U, Ul c 1 

< H cdl 


CD CD (J 

O rH rH 


00 

rH 


CD 
O 


Ul 
cOl 


i0 
CO 


ON 




1 «d 




ap^jQ x^-XON 


w 


m 


a, 


u, 




a3y 


vO 


m 


<r 


m 








303fqns 


§ 


so 


CM 


O 

CM 


00 


CM 





-28- 
Table 2B "breaks down the remaining two achievement tests , CIRCUS 5 
( Letters and Numbers ) and CIRCUS 2 ( How Much and How Many ) , in exactly 
the same way. That is, absolute scores and percentiles based on national 
kindergarten norms are given for the total test and its three subparts 
on a pre-post basis; scores are followed by interpretive comments gener- 
ated for each subject on the basis of the obtained outcome pattern. 

In general, the outcome breakdown as well as the comments indicate 
that younger subjects are improving in most aspects of verbal and quanti- 
tative performance. More importantly, the post test percentile scores 
(indicating the number of kindergarteners in the national norming sample 
who scored below the decile range in which the subject's score fell) 
present a rather optimistic picture. Considering all l6 post test scores 
for the four tests, only three fell in the bottom 10 percent; six scores 
fell in the second decile; five scores fell in the third decile; and two 
scores were in the upper 50 percent. In view of the circumstance that 
the percentile norms were obtained from visually unimpaired subjects of 
the same age, along with the fact that Killian subjects had only a half 
year's use of the ICTS, we find the post test performance of our pre- 
academic subjects very promising. 

Visually Dependent Skills 

A second important evaluation objective is to track subjects' 
progress in visually dependent skill areas, including visual -motor 
integration and visual memory. We have hypothesized that these phenom- 
ena are implicated in information encoding, processing, and decoding 
when learning activities are visually mediated. Consequently, these 
phenomena should be closely related to academic achievement, especially 
for partially sighted students using the ICTS. In assessing visually 



-29- 



dependent skills, three measures have been employed. The Developmental Test 

of Visual Motor Integration (VMI, Follett Educational Corporation, reviewed 

3 
in Buros, 1972) was given on a pre-post basis to all subjects (n = 13). One 

of two visual memory tests was also administered. Madison subjects and 
younger Killian subjects took See and Remember (CIRCUS 12, a visual recogni- 
tion memory test) on a pre-post basis (n = 10). In addition, for comparison 

purposes, all subjects at the Killian site were given the Illinois Test of 

3 
Psycholinguistic Abilities (ITPA, reviewed in Buros, 1972) visual sequential 

memory subtest in the fall (n = 8). Because the ITPA seemed to tap aspects 

of memory not required in CIRCUS 12 and because it spanned a broader grade 

range, we decided to administer it to all subjects at both sites at post test 

time (n = 13). Results of evaluations of visually dependent skills appear in 

Table 3. 

The first three columns of Table 3 present information regarding VMI 

scores, represented as age equivalents in months. Post test scores appear 

first followed by pretest scores, the third column indicating the pre-to-post 

test gain or loss. Investigating the relationship between fall and spring 

scores by means of a Wilcoxen matched-pairs signed ranks test established 

that a substantial improvement in visual motor integration had occurred 

(T = 6, p < .005) among subjects in both sites. Although subjects in the two 

sites did not differ with respect to amount of improvement over the academic 

year, Madison subjects' outcomes were significantly higher than outcomes for 

Killian subjects as determined by a Mann-Whitney U test (U = 10, p < .085). 

Because this post test difference cannot be attributed to age (both the 

youngest and the oldest subjects are in the Killian classroom, so that age is 

not a variable which statistically discriminates sites), we think it should 

be attributed to more extensive ICTS experience. 



-SO- 
TABLE^ 
VISUALLY DEPENDENT SKILLS 





VISUAL 


MOTOR INTEGRATION 


Post 
Test 


ITPA** 

Pre 

Test 


Change 


CIRCUS 12*** 
(See & Remember) 

Post Pre 

Test Test Change 


POST TEST COMPARISONS 


Post 
Test 


Pre 
Test 


Change 


Months CA- 
5 }CA) vMI 


CA- 
ITPA 


VMI- 
I&PA 


101 


104 


86 


+18 


64 






19 


19 ±0 


139 -35 


-75 


+40 


102 


82 


82 


± 


67 






16 


18 -2 


135 -53 


-68 


+15 


103 


94 


77 


+17 


125* 






20 


20 ±0 


110 -16 


+15 


-31 


104 


131 


94 


+37 


125* 






20 


19 +1 


118 +13 


+ 7 


+ 6 


105 


67 


60 


+ 7 


82 






19 


19 10 


80 -13 


+ 2 


-15 


201 


82 


70 


+12 


78 


100 


-22 






102 -20 


-24 


+ 4 


203 


114 


66 


+48 


78 


94 


-16 






148 -34 


-70 


+36 


204 


49 


57 


- 8 


67 


52 


+15 


10 


12 -2 


82 -33 


-15 


-18 


205 


88 


77 


+11 


74 


74 


± 


17 


17 ±0 


79 +9 


- 5 


+14 


206 


57 


54 


+ 3 


125* 


58 


+67 


13 


15 -2 


73 -16 


+52 


+68 


207 


63 


52 


+11 


67 


74 


- 7 


15 


11 +4 


65 - 2 


+ 2 


- 4 


208 


57 


52 


+ 5 


58 


37 


+21 


13 


11 +2 


68 -11 


-10 


- 1 


210 


94 


88 


+ 6 


70 


67 


+ 3 






141 -47 


-71 


+24 



*Ceiling Scores 
**ITPA was not administered to Madison subjects in Fall 1976. 

***Circus was administered to Madison subjects and only to younger Killian students who 
took the Circus achievement battery. 



-31- 



Visual memory assessments are represented "by the two middle sections 
of Table 3. First are ITPA scores, again given in age equivalents. 
While overall change data are not available, scores from the Killian 
site (n = 8) were examined on a pre-post basis using the Wilcoxen T test. 
This analysis did not indicate a statistically significant improvement 
in visual sequential memory during the school year as measured by the 
ITPA. Nor did a Mann-Whitney U test establish any between-site differ- 
ences in visual memory outcomes, despite the Madison subjects' greater 
previous practice in visual information processing. The ITPA had been 
introduced into the evaluation because it appeared to tap more complex 
and sequential aspects of visual memory than CIRCUS 12 and because it had 
a broader age range. However, we were concerned about three features 
of the ITPA: (l) it does not involve association of verbal labels with 
visual stimuli; (2) it employs only abstract geometric shapes as items; 
and (3) it requires reproduction rather than simple recognition of the 
correct sequence. While these features render the test valuable for 
many experimental purposes, we were dubious about the extent to which 
they represent and measure the kinds of visual information processes 
required for effective ICTS use to enhance reading achievement. After 
discussing the CIRCUS 12 data, we will treat these questions in more 
detail as we examine the relationships among all the visual skill 
measures . 

CIRCUS 12, See and Remember , is the visual memory test originally 
chosen for the evaluation. Table 3 presents post test, pretest, and 
change scores on this measure for 10 subjects. (Range of possible scores 
is to 20; no age or grade equivalent scales are available for this test.) 



-32- 



Here change data also fail to yield statistically significant results, 
presumably because so many subjects are near or at ceiling. Post test 
scores on CIRCUS 12 do differentiate sites with Madison subjects exhib- 
iting superior performance as indicated by a Mann-Whitney U test (U = 1, 
p < .008). This difference is, however, partially a function of age 
since the oldest Killian subjects were ineligible for CIRCUS 12. Interest- 
ingly, CIRCUS 12 visual memory scores correlated more closely with visual 
motor integration (rho = .92, p < .01) than with ITPA visual memory 
scores (rho = .1*8, p - .10). 

The last section of Table 3 contains the following information. It 
gives each subject's chronological age (CA) in months at the time of 
post testing. The succeeding two columns, respectively, show the rela- 
tionship between CA and VMI scores and between CA and ITPA scores. In 
each case, the age equivalent test score is subtracted from the chrono- 
logical age; thus negative numbers indicate. subjects are performing 
below the level represented by the chronological age while positive 
numbers indicate they are performing above age level. Finally, the 
last column subtracts ITPA scores from VMI scores to determine whether 
(as we had hypothesized) the ITPA is more difficult; here positive 
numbers indicate superior performance on the VMI. 

First, we examined the relationship between CA and VMI scores using 
a Wilcoxen T test. This analysis established that ICTS subjects in both 
sites are performing below the level of their normally sighted age mates 
(T = 6, p < .005); the CA-VMI column yields only two positive scores. 
The same analysis establishes a similar but weaker relationship between 
CA and ITPA scores. That is, ITPA scores also tend to fall below age 



-33- 

normal (T = 21.5, p < .10); but while the range of negative deviation 
is greater, the number of positive scores is also greater in the 
CA-ITPA column. The last column was similarly examined by means of 
a Wilcoxen T test. The results were nonsignificant (T = Ul), suggesting 
that there is not a directional bias in the relationship between ITPA 
and VMI scores; that is, subjects' performance on the ITPA does not 
seem to be either systematically inferior or systematically superior 
to their VMI performance. We are thus obliged to reject the hypothesis 
that the ITPA is more difficult. 

Finally, we undertook to investigate the association between these 
visually dependent skills and reading and mathematics achievement. For 
this purpose, we employed the following sorts of derived measures. To 
control for age differences, each subject's basic skill achievement at 
post test time was represented by the distance between the CTBS reading 
and mathematics scores and the grade normal score (v. Table l); simi- 
larly, each subject's visual skills were represented by the distance 
between the VMI and ITPA scores and the age normal score (v. Table 3). 
A Spearman rank correlation (n = 8) established an extremely strong 
association between CTBS achievement and visual motor integration 
(rho = .99, P < .01). A similar but less strong correlation linked 
achievement with ITPA visual memory scores (rho = .83, p < .05). 
Because so few subjects took both CIRCUS 12 and CTBS, we were unable to 
test their association; however, the high correlation between CIRCUS 12 
and VMI suggests that, if the latter is strongly related to achievement, 
so must the former be also. We conclude, then, that visual motor integra- 
tion and visual memory are skills which, for partially sighted students, 
are importantly related to achievement and can be enhanced through ICTS 



-34- 

use. It further seems to us that, although CIRCUS 12 and ITPA measure 
different aspects of visual memory, they both tap achievement-related 
features of visual information processing. 

Self and Social Attitudes 

Attitudinal information comprises the last major assessment area to 
be discussed in this chapter. We have assumed that while visual informa- 
tion processing skills are involved in achievement, academic progress is 
also mediated by psychosocial variables. We will treat below data 
representing factors affecting test performance and other relevant self 
and social attitudes. 

It is well established in education research literature that the 
test-taking experience often contributes importantly to test scores. 
We had hypothesized that, for the subjects of the present study, test- 
taking has been frequently associated with failure and anxiety; such 
associations, however, can contribute negatively to test outcomes. We 
further conjectured that, if the I'CTS enhances learning experiences, it 
could lead to changed expectations and changed test-taking attitudes 
and, subsequently, to better test performance. For this reason, we 
chose to administer on a pre-post basis the Inventory of Factors 
Affecting Test Performance (FATP) . Ratings of behavior during achieve- 
ment test-taking were collected from classroom teachers using a set of 
Ik three-point examiner rating scales adapted from the Stanford Binet 
Form L-M. Scores on the inventory may range from lU to k2, with higher 
scores indicating more desirable behaviors in the achievement test 
situation. Table h presents total post test, pretest, and change 
scores for all subjects in columns one through three. The last three 
columns single out for attention the combined scores on items 9 and 10 
from the inventory. 



-35- 



TABLE 4 



FACTORS AFFECTING TEST PERFORMANCE 







TOTAL 




ITEMS 9 


& 10 






Post 


Pre 




Post Pre 








Test 


Test 


Change 


Test Test 


Change 




101 


36 


36 


±0 


5 3 


+2 




102 


27 


26 


+1 


4 2 


+2 




103 


26 


25 


+1 


3 2 


+1 




104 


32 


33 


-1 


4 2 


+2 




105 


32 


27 


+5 


2 2 


±0 




201 


31 


31 


±0 


2 4 


-2 




203 


26 


23 


+3 


2 2 


±0 




204 


16 


25 


-9 


2 3 


-1 




205 


27 


31 


-4 


2 4 


-2 




206 


23 


26 


-3 


2 2 


±0 




207 


28 


32 


-4 


2 3 


-1 




208 


32 


25 


+7 


4 3 


+1 




210 


26 


28 


-2 


2 3 


-1 





-36- 



A preliminary investigation of pretest data had provided only a 
weak positive correlation between fall achievement test scores and FATP 
ratings. Looking more closely at the rating scales, we found six items 
on which there was virtually no variation. This circumstance led us 
to believe that the common history of our subjects as visually impaired 
students had generated a rather invariant response to the test-taking 
situation that would not be easy to overcome. Among these responses, 
some could be viewed as positive and not needing any change (e.g., "fear 
of adult" and "compliance with adult" were uniformly rated in a favorable 
manner). Two, however, were uniformly awarded a negative rating ("sense 
of intellectual challenge" and "willingness to continue with test"); 
we therefore proposed to give special attention to outcomes on these items 
(9 and 10 ). We hoped to see some change in sense of challenge and willing- 
ness to continue, and consequently to find a changed relationship between 
these factors and achievement. It is not surprising, then, to find that 
the fall-to-spring change for the test as a whole is not statistically 
significant. However, substantial improvement on items 9 and 10 is 
evident among Madison subjects. To demonstrate this, because the range 
of scores was small, we recast the change data in binary form, asking 
simply whether the subject improved (received a positive change score) 
or not (received either a or a negative score). A Fischer's exact 
test then established that Madison subjects, in contrast with Killian 
subjects, showed significant positive change (p = .03). It is presumably 
this difference on items 9 and 10 which acounts for the fact that, by 
post test time, Madison subjects are receiving total inventory scores 
systematically higher than scores received by Killian subjects 



-37- 



( Mann -Whitney U = 9-5 > p < • O85) despite the absence of "bet we en-group 
differences in the fall. Finally, at post testing a stronger positive 
correlation had been established between actual achievement as measured 
by the CTBS and factors affecting test performance (rho = .U3, p = .10). 

Self and social attitudes were assessed by means of two instruments, 

the Self Social Constructs Test (SSCT) and the Self Observation Scales 

12 
(SOS). The Self Social Constructs Test (v. review in Walker, 1973) is 

a nonverbal instrument which employs spatial symbols and their arrange- 
ment to represent self and social schemata. For the purpose of this 
evaluation, we sought to assess six constructs via such schemata: self 
esteem, social distance from significant others, scope of peer attachment, 
social interest, perceived inclusion, and perceived individuation. 
Table 5 presents data regarding three self-social constructs, self 
esteem, social distance (from peers and teachers respectively); and 
scope of peer attachment. In each case the post test score appears, 
followed by the pretest score and the fall-to-spring change. Data 
regarding social interest, perceived inclusion and perceived individua- 
tion have been omitted. These constructs did not show significant 
differences either between fall and spring scores , or between sites at 
either time. In part, such outcomes reflect the very small range of 
possible scores on these constructs (0-U and 0-2); besides restricting 
the space for change, the limited range produces a great number of tied 
ranks which vitiates the effectiveness of ordinal statistics. 

With respect to self esteem, an overall examination of post test 
outcomes in relation to pretest scores reveals no systematic difference. 
However, the change scores on this construct suggest that Killian subjects 



-38- 



TABLE 5 



SELF SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS TEST 











SOCIAL DISTANCE 


SOCIAL DISTANCE 


ATTACHMENT 




SELF ESTEEM 


FROM STUDENTS 


FROM TEACHERS 


TO PEERS 




Post 


Pre 




Post Pre 


Post Pre 


Post Pre 




Test 


Test 


Change 


Test Test Change* 


Test Test Change* 


Test Test Change 


101 


39 


38 


+ 1 


2 7 -5 


2 2 ± 


24 24 ±0 


102 


24 


34 


-10 


7 10 -3 


6 3+3 


23 18 +5 


103 


26 


27 


- 1 


9 7 +2 


12 4+8 


18 21 - 3 


104 


29 


28 


+ 1 


2 5 -3 


2 4+2 


24 24 ±0 


105 


20 


23 


- 3 


8 6 +2 


11 10 +1 


21 23 - 2 


201 


28 


20 


+ 8 


10 4 +6 


7 9-2 


21 14 +7 


203 


39 


27 


+12 


2 5 -3 


2 8-6 


19 5 +14 


204 


23 


33 


-10 


6 2 +4 


5 2+3 


2 13 -11 


205 


34 


24 


+10 


7 2 +5 


2 2 ± 


23 3 +20 


206 


27 


37 


-10 


7 9 -2 


6 7-1 


7 15 - 8 


207 


34 


32 


+ 2 


3 4 -1 


12 2 +10 


15 14 + 1 ! 


208 


22 


23 


- 1 


2 6 -4 


2 5-3 


16 12 +4 


210 


45 


29 


+16 


2 9 +7 


12 10 +2 


19 18 +1 



(range: 8-48) 



(range: 2-12) 



(range: 2-12) 



(range: 0-24) 



^Negative changes are representative of decreased 
social distance (i.e., favorable change). 



-39- 



experienced greater positive change in self esteem than Madison subjects 
(Mann-Whitney U = 11, p = .ll). Consequently, Killian subjects tend to 
obtain higher post test scores, although this tendency is not statisti- 
cally significant. Neither social distance measures exhibits significant 
fall-to-spring changes overall. However, a between-site comparison 
indicates that Madison subjects, in contrast to Killian subjects, per- 
ceive themselves as having become more distant from their teacher by 
post test time (Fischer's exact test, p = .10). We attribute this dif- 
ference to the circumstance that in the spring the Madison class was 
being instructed by a substitute teacher, the regular teacher having been 
on leave from April to the end of the academic year. Finally, the 
attachment to peers measure shows the following interesting pattern. 
At post test time, scope of peer attachment is significantly broader 
among Madison than among Killian students (Mann-Whitney U = 6, p < .03). 
This result is to be expected since Madison subjects have been part of 
an ICTS group for a longer period and, in fact, are near ceiling on this 
measure. But examining the change scores reveals that fall-to-spring 
increases occur primarily among the Killian subjects, a trend that 
approximates statistical significance. 

The second attitude instrument employed, the SOS, is a nationally 
normed verbal self report measure designed to assess psychosocial constructs 
thought to be related to school success (from National Testing Service; 
v. Katzenmeyer and Stenner, 1975). 1X Table 6 below presents two types of 
pre-post scores (T-scores and percentile ranks, respectively) for each of 
four socioemotional dimensions (self acceptance, social maturity, school 
affiliation, and self security in that order) tapped by the test. Differ- 
ence scores represent fall to spring changes in T scores. 



<3J 
H 

■s 

Eh 



CO 

Ss 

o 

CO 
H 

< 

I 

O 
CJ 

H 

CO 

o 

W 

mi 

Pu 



CO 

O 
CO 



CO 


co 


4J 


4J 


CJ 


CJ 


0) 


a) 


■1-1 


■n 


•a 


J= 


3 


3 


cn 


W 


c 


c 


o 


CO 


cn 


■H 


•H 


^i 


T) 


rH 


rt 


•H 


2 


^ 



o o 
o o 

iH CM 





ai 






















-I 


kO- 
































u 
























































C 




' 




















































cu 
























































Vj 
























































0) 




vT> 




ON 




rH 




i-H 




o 




<r 




O, 




CO 




CM 




CO 




<r 




CO 




r-~ 




14-4 




+ 




1 




1 




+ 




+ 1 




+ 




+ 1 




+ 




i—i 




1 




1 




1 




+ 


>^ 


NH 




































+ 


















H 


■H 






















































H 


a 






















































OS 

w 


6^8 


NO 


nO 








CO 










































as 


<J- 


m 


m 


VO 


VO 


v£) 


CN 


o 


NO 


NO 


^H 


r-t 


<r 


ON 


O 


m 


o 


<r 


CM 


i-H 


rH 


oo 


C/3 




00 


OS 


no 


cO 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


00 


ON 


r-- 


r~- 


o 


O 


CO 


r~ 


iH 


o 


m 


CO 


<r 


CO 


CO 


m 
















































































































UJ 


to 






















































CO 


CD 

c 
























































i— 1 


f» 


LO 


NO 


nO 


in 


NO 


r^ 


h» 


1^ 


ON 


CO 


r^ 


r^ 


CM 


m 


nD 


00 


r^ 


<j- 


o 


-o 


oo 


m 


in 


CN 




u 


NO 


NO 


m 


-T 


no 


nO 


so 


v£) 


vO 


NO 


m 


^o 


m 


m 


CN 


CM 


^r 


m 


CO 


CO 


m 


•st 


vt 


<r 


<r 


m 




01 
























































1 
H 
























































0) 
























































y 
























































c 
























































0) 

M 
CO 




















































Z 




i-t 




m 




CO 




<-\ 




<T 




CO 




CN 




<r 




ON 




CN 




CO 




<t 




to 


o 


•^ 




+ 




+ 




1 




+ 




CN 




iH 




+ 




l 




i 




H 




H 




■H 




I 


1— 1 


14-1 




















+ 




1 
















+ 




1 




1 






H 


■H 






















































< 


n 






















































H 
























































r-1 

H 














































































































Pk 


^ 


ON 


CNI 


NO 


CN 


on 


ON 


ON 


CN 


■vj- 


NO 


p~- 


CO 


CM 


NO 


CO 


oo 


oo 


<r 


<■ 


ON 


00 


■H 


<r 


<r 


<r 


<r 


[x-l 




r». 


oo 


nO 


00 


r- 


NO 


r-^ 


00 


o 


r^ 


Csl 


o 


oo 


00 


r^ 


m 


m 


CM 


CM 


NO 


rH 


O 


00 


CO 


m 


CO 


< 
-1 












































































































O 


CO 




















































O 
EC 

u 


0) 
rJ 
O 






















































oo 


as 


<r 


ON 


co 


m 


oo 


ON 


CO 


r>» 


<t 


i-H 


ON 


1—1 


NO 


CM 


CN 


CO 


CO 


in 


H 


00 


o 


NO 


rH 


NO 


CO 


en 
I 

H 


U~| 


ITI 


LO 


m 


m 


in 


in 


in 


CO 


m 


<r 


CO 


m 


NO 


m 


m 


m 


<r 


■J- 


m 


-o- 


CM 


NO 


<t 


m 


<]■ 


, _ , 
























































cu 
























































CJ 
























































c 
























































CD 
r-l 

0) 


























































rH 




<■ 




H 




i-H 




CO 




H 




CN 




CM 




NO 




NO 




<-{ 




CN 




o 


>-l 


M-l 




1 




+ 




I 




+ 




+ 




1 




1 




+ 




+ 




+ 




+ 




+ 




rH 
+ 


H 


IH 




















































H 


•H 






















































rt 


Q 






















































H 
























































&~S 


NO 


CN 


o 


nO 


co 


as 


CO 


vD 


CN 


CO 


*o 


CO 


<r 


ON 


rH 


H 


NO 


ON 


i-H 


CM 


CM 


CM 


o 


■<r 


co 


<r 






NO 


nO 


m 


nO 


r-^ 


no 


r^ 


r^. 


vp 


r-- 


r^- 


r^ 


00 


r- 


o 


O 


<r 


NO 


O 


o 


O 


O 


H 


rH 


rH 


m 


H 














































































































CJ 


CO 






















































o 


0) 

u 
o 






















































CO 


^3- 


CO 


o 


<r 


no 


m 


vD 


r^ 


CO 


nO 


r^- 


NO 


o 


00 


<r 


NO 


ON 


m 


<f 


o 


ON 


o 


r^ 


ON 


rH 


rH 




u 


LO 


m 


m 


m 


m 


LO 


in 


m 


m 


m 


m 


m 


NO 


in 


CM 


CN 


<r 


m 


CN 


CO 


CN 


CO 


CO 


CO 


<f 


m 




en 






















































1 


I 

H 


k 














































- 






F 


0) 
























































u 
























































c. 
























































GJ 

u 




<t 




NO 




r~« 




>-l 




vO 




in 




r-H 




H 




r>. 




CN 




CM 




? 




oo 




cu 




+ 




1 




1 




+ 




i—i 




+ 




+ 




1 




H 




+ 




1 






+ 


UJ 


4-1 




















+ 
















+ 


















CJ 


14—1 






















































H 
Cu 
W 
o 


•H 













































































































6*5 


nO 


CO 


<t 


NO 


o 


CO 


CM 


CO 


CM 


CN 


oo 


NO 


CN 


<!■ 


CO 


ON 


CM 


ON 


oo 


<r 


1-1 


sO 


CM 


CM 


<* 


■<r 


CJ 




oo 


ON 


oo 


NO 


ON 


r^ 


as 


ON 


<r 


On 


m 


r^. 


00 


00 


r~ 


NO 


r— i 


NO 


.H 


CM 


CN 


r-t 


NO 


NO 


CM 


m 


< 






















































, 
























































J 


cn 






















































UJ 


CD 






















































CO 


o 


i—i 


LO 


o 


<T 


m 


vO 


<T 


m 


oo 


~* 


CN 


r~- 


ON 


O 


^o 


m 


00 


in 


i-H 


CO 


CM 


O 


CO 


CO 


CO 


rH 




CJ 


nO 


NO 


NO 


m 


no 


in 


\D 


\o 


sj- 


vO 


m 


m 


m 


NO 


m 


m 


CO 


m 


<r 


<r 


<r 


<J 


m 


m 


<r 


m 




CO 
























































1 

H 






















































C/" 






4-1 




4-1 




4-1 




4-1 




4-1 




4-J 




4-1 




4-1 




4J 




4-1 




4-1 




4-1 




4-1 


E- 




QJ 


cn 


CD 


cn 


cu 


CO 


a) 


cn 


0) 


cn 


<u 


cn 


cu 


CO 


cu 


cn 


cu 


CO 


cu 


CO 


cu 


CO 


0) 


CO 


cu 


cn 


t_ 




V-i 


o 


u 


o 


u 


O 


u 


o 


u 


o 


u 


o 


u 


O 


u 


o 


u 


o 


u 


o 


l-l 


o 


u 


o 


^-i 


o 


U- 




a 


. P 


. p 


o 


p 


. P 


. p 


< P 


. p 


. P 


. p 


- p 


. p 


a 


p. 


p. 


p. 


p. 


p. 


p. 


p, 


p. 


p- 


p. 


P- 


p. 


1 — 




i—i 


I—I 


CN 


<N 


co 


CO 


<r 


<t 


m 


m 


1-H 


rH 


CO 


CO 


<j- 


<T 


in 


m 


NO 


NO 


r~~ 


r-- 


co 


CO 


o 


o 




> 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


rH 


i— i 


L7 


1 


rH 


1 H 


H 


rH 


i-H 


H 


H 


H 


i-H 


i-H 


CM 


C^l 


CN 


CN 


1 CM 


CN 


CM 


CM 


OJ 


CN 


C^i 


CM 


CN 


CM 


| CN 


CM 



-41- 



An examination of fall and spring scores across sites (using a 
Wilcoxen matched pairs test) revealed slight change overall, an outcome 
consonant with conclusions drawn from the analysis of 1916-1911 Self 
Social Constructs Test data. Only social maturity scores indicated a 
significant gain (p < .05) during the school year, an outcome not 
specifically associated with the demonstration and probably reflective 
of normal social development with increasing school experience. Two 
SOS dimensions have some face relevance to self esteem as measured by 
SSCT, self acceptance and self security. Both dimensions seemed to 
indicate that Killian subjects experienced greater positive change, 
although only the score difference on the latter dimension is statisti- 
cally significant (Mann Whitney U = 6.5, P < .05). Such a difference in 
extent of change corroborates SSCT results. However, on both SOS 
dimensions, the first generation site scores significantly higher at 
post test (self acceptance: U = 6, p < .05; self security: U = *+.5, 
p = .01). In contrast, the SSCT post test data generated no significant 
between-site differences, although the second generation site appeared 
to score somewhat higher. These discrepancies between the two socio- 
emotional assessments led us to explore their association. Using a 
Spearman rank correlation, a rho value = . 0^ characterized the relation- 
ship between self esteem (SSCT) and self acceptance (SOS), while self 
esteem (SSCT) and self security (SOS) correlated at .22; the average 
intercorrelation among these ostensibly similar constructs was .13. 
However, self acceptance (SOS) and self security (SOS) achieve a 
highly significant rho value = .81. We entertain the hypothesis that 
the two SOS self attitude dimensions are related to one another in part 



-42- 



because of verbal method bias -which operates in favor of older Madison 
subjects who are better readers. Because the SSCT is a nonverbal 
assessment, social desirability response biasing is minimized as is 
dependence on reading skill. 

The two socially-oriented dimensions of the SOS, social maturity 
and school affiliation, were similarly investigated in relation to pre- 
sumably relevant SSCT measures (scope of peer attachment, social distance 
from students, social distance from the teacher). Both SOS social 
dimensions yielded significant or nearly significant differences on 
post test scores favoring the Madison subjects (social maturity: 
U = 11, p s .10; school affiliation: U=5.5,pS.Ol). A similarly 
significant difference between groups emerged at post-test on the SSCT 
measure of peer attachment. However, the SSCT peer attachment dimension 
shows an approximately significant rate of positive change favoring Killian 
subjects, a pre-post trend that does not appear in the SOS data. On the 
contrary, SOS data locate a significant difference in positive change 
scores only among Madison subjects and only on the measure of school 
affiliation (U = 7, p < .05). This result was surprising in view of the 
fact that Madison subjects had a substitute teacher for the last month 
of school (the time at which these assessments were made) and SSCT 
measures of social distance indicated Madison students felt significantly 
less close to their relatively new teacher at the end of the year. 
Again, we investigated these discrepancies by exploring patterns of 
correlations among SOS and SSCT constructs. The SSCT peer attachment 
measure was significantly and positively associated with the SOS measure 
of social maturity (rho = .66), and nearly attained a significant 



-43- 

positive correlation with school affiliation (rho = .Ul). Social 
distance from students and teachers (SSCT) showed a negative relation- 
ship to school affiliation (SOS) as expected, hut the correlation was 
not significant (rho average = -.29). 

In many respects, then, the SOS and the SSCT provide somewhat 
corroborative assessments of similar psychosocial dimensions. However, 
the strength of the corroboration is not impressive, and is vitiated 
by instances in which the two instruments yield discrepant conclusions. 
These discrepancies notwithstanding, both sets of results suggest 
students are gaining in self esteem and advancing in peer relationships 
as well. 

Conclusions from the First Year 

Achievement evaluation results for the 1975-1976 academic year 
generated the following conclusions. First, cross-site comparisons of 
within-subject scores showed ICTS students improving significantly in 
both reading and mathematics as expected. Second, between-site compari- 
sons of both pre-measures and post-measures in the two basic skill areas 
found students at the first generation site closer to grade normal than 
students in the second generation classroom. This direction of differ- 
ence had been predicted on the basis of the fact that the ICTS had been 
in operation longer at the former site. We had further hypothesized 
that the initial between-site difference would decrease by post-test 
time; accordingly, no statistically significant differences between 
classrooms in terms of distance of student scores from grade normal 
remained at the end of the school year. Beyond these basic findings, 
two additional results are worth noting. Older students* achievement 



-44- 



scores in both reading and mathematics were significantly more distant 
from grade normal than were younger students' scores. This outcome 
reflects the cumulative aspect of educational deficits and suggests 
the importance of the ICTS for partially sighted students early in 
their school experience. Another noteworthy outcome is that, despite 
the rather high correlation between reading and mathematics scores, 
subjects performed significantly better in mathematics than in reading. 
We have supposed that the relative superiority of ICTS subjects in 
mathematics is accounted for by the fact that doing computations requires 
less scanning than does reading. 

Examination of data from assessments of visually dependent percep- 
tual motor skills yielded similar, if less strong, conclusions. With 
respect to visual motor integration, ICTS students in both sites were 
performing below the level of their fully sighted age-mates. However, 
both groups made significant gains during the school year. Although 
the two groups did not differ in total amount of improvement over the 
year, post test scores for site I subjects were significantly higher 
than those for site II subjects. This discrepancy is probably attrib- 
utable to more extensive ICTS experience at the first generation site. 
Visual memory data, in contrast, were less clear. Visual associative 
memory, as measured by CIRCUS 12, showed no significant gains during 
the school year, an outcome we believe is due to the occurrence of 
so many near-ceiling scores on the pretest. This assessment did, 
however, yield significant between-site differences favoring students 
in the first generation classroom (i.e., those who had been using the 
system longer). Visual sequential memory, as measured by the ITPA, did 



-45- 



not yield any significant school year gains for students in either site; 
likewise, it did not establish any between-site differences. Control- 
ling for age and grade level, a strong association was obtained between 
both sorts of visual memory and achievement test performance. We thus 
inferred that while the two measures tap different aspects of visual 
memory, both are representing achievement-related features of visual 
information processing in our subject population. 

The third area of concern, attitudes relevant to school experience, 
was investigated using three types of measures. Attitudes toward test 
taking, rated by teachers using the Factors Affecting Test Performance 
scales, did not change substantially during the course of the year. 
Premeasures indicated ceiling and floor effects for many items. Among 
them, "sense of intellectual challenge" and "willingness to continue" 
were uniformly negative and were targeted for special attention. 
Students in the first generation site (but not in the second generation 
site) had improved significantly on these two items by the end of the 
school year. Self and social attitude dimensions were assessed by 
manipulation of geometric symbols representing the self and others 
(Self Social Constructs Test) and by verbal self report (Self Observa- 
tion Scales). When the combined self attitude scores for the two sites 
were examined, no overall change appeared in either data set, but both 
instruments evidenced significant gains in self attitude among site II 
students when scores were analyzed on a between-classroom basis. How- 
ever, this change did not overcome initial differences in self attitude 
favoring students in the first generation classroom. A similar pattern 
of results appeared in relation to social attitudes; that is, site I 



-46- 



students obtained higher scores while site II students manifested 
greater positive change during the year. 

In summary, the first project year established that, in many 
respects, participation in an ICTS classroom improves school experience 
for partially sighted students. This outcome, most evident in basic 
skill achievement, was substantiated by examination of change scores 
and by between-site comparisons. In general, students in both sites 
improved; while students in the first generation classroom who had 
used the ICTS longer showed initial advantages, students in the second 
generation site were observed in many instances to make greater gains 
during the year. 



-47- 



CHAPTER III 



During its second year of operation, the primary aim of the 
Interactive Classroom Television Systems project remained unchanged — 
to improve the educational experiences of partially sighted elementary 
school students. While the extent of realization of project objectives 
in the first year was notable, a longer implementation period was re- 
quired in order to determine whether initial advances would continue 
and whether a similar pattern of gains would reappear. The systems 
were housed in the same two classrooms as "before, staffed by the same 
teachers. However, as the data collection schedule in Chapter II 
indicates, there was limited subject turnover at each site. 

The evaluation procedures for the 1916-1911 school year adhered 
closely to those specified for the first year (v. Chapter II). The 
same analysis plan guided the investigation, and the three outcome 
domains were similarly assessed. However, within each evaluation area 
results from the preceding year provided a focus for our examination 
of subsequent data. In the domain of achievement evaluation, for 
example, the first year's data suggested that, while significant gains 
were made in both basic skill areas, students were more rapidly ap- 
proaching grade normal in mathematics than in reading. Given the 
hypothesis that the greater scanning ability required in reading was 
responsible for this discrepancy, then if further ICTS experience 
provided students with greater scanning ability, stronger reading gains 
should be apparent during the second year. In addition, the importance 
of avoiding early educational deficits in basic skills implied we should 
monitor carefully the performance of younger students on the ICTS. 



-48- 



In the area of visually dependent perceptual and motor skills, outcomes 
at the end of the first school year indicated that students were making sub- 
stantial advances in visual motor integration, a success not paralled in 
the visual memory data. Believing that visual associative memory scores 
failed to show significant change due to ceiling effects, we thought another 
test with younger subjects was requisite. No similar explanation, however, 
would account for lack of significant change in visual sequential memory. 
But if it, like reading, also depended on scanning ability, then the second 
year's ICTS experience might well generate advances in visual sequential 
memory as well as in reading. 

Finally, the attitude domain seemed most recalcitrant to change 
on the basis of the previous year's results. School-relevant self and 
social attitudes did not show positive pre-post differences commensurate 
with achievement gains. We surmised that the common prior history of 
ICTS subjects as often-tested visually impaired students had engendered 
a rather invariant failure expectation that would not be easy to over- 
come. Beyond that, we began to suspect that self and social attitudes 
of partially sighted students are visually mediated — that the ability 
accurately to perceive and respond to others' feelings is an important 
part of psychosocial development which most likely involves successful 
affect encoding and decoding. Thus for partially sighted students, 
interpersonal competence might well rely on visual skills just as 
academic competence does. ICTS-based learning activities in the class- 
room had, however, focused primarily on instructional media and had not 
been explicitly deployed to enhance social perception and communication. 
It was therefore decided to assess facial affect encoding and decoding 
among ICTS subjects on a pre-test basis in the 1976-1977 school year. 



-49- 



Subsequent curricular plans would include specific attention to and 
practice in recognition and production of facial signs of emotion, with 
a post -measurement of affect encoding and decoding in the third project 
year. For this purpose, two new assessments were introduced. To mea- 
sure affect recognition, the Inter-Person Perception Test (Heussenstam 
and Hoepfner, 1969) was employed. Briefly, the test presents a number 
of stimulus photographs; these are faces of children and adults collec- 
tively representing a broad range of affect. The subject is asked to 
respond to each stimulus picture by selecting, from a row of photo- 
graphs of another person, a second picture which shows the same feeling 
as the first. For exploring affect encoding, Ekman's facial affect pro- 
duction tasks were introduced (Ekman and Friesen, 1975). These tasks 
require subjects to "make faces" representing different emotions (happy, 
sad, angry, afraid, surprised, disgusted) as well as a neutral face. 
Each state is photographed twice, and scored for appropriateness of 
expression on several dimensions validated in Ekman's research. These 
new assessments will, we think, contribute importantly to knowledge 
about mediators of self and social constructs among partially sighted 
elementary school students. Succeeding sections of this chapter present 
1976-1977 results in the three outcome areas just discussed. 

Academic Achievement 



It will be recalled that academic achievement in basic skill areas 
is assessed using standardized achievement tests. Those who are perform- 
ing at the first grade level or above received the Comprehensive Test of 
Basic Skills (CTBS) while those performing below first grade level are 
tested with a subset of the CIRCUS battery. Scores of older students 
are discussed first. 



-50- 

Table 7 presents academic achievement outcomes of higher grade 
level students for the 1916-1911 year in the following way. Subjects 
are first represented in terms of their chronological age and "normal" 
grade in order to provide a basis for interpreting subsequent informa- 
tion. The next column gives the reading achievement score at post test 
in terms of grade equivalent as measured by the CTBS, and is followed 
by a column representing the distance between the obtained score and a 
"grade normal" score. The third column under Reading presents the pre- 
test score in grade equivalent terms, and the last shows the change 
from fall to spring score in grade equivalents. Mathematics achieve- 
ment data are tabled in the same way. The final column in the table 
shows the difference between reading and mathematics achivement scores. 
Means are given at the bottom of all distance and difference columns. 

Examining the pre-to-post changes is our primary interest here. 
For this purpose, we employed a Wilcoxen matched-pairs signed-ranks 
test (n = 10). In mathematics, students' scores showed a significant 

increase from fall to spring (T = k, p < .02), gaining 8 months on 
average during a 10-month school year. This rate of achievement compares 
favorably with average school year gains for low income and minority 
students such as ours who do not have visual impairment. At year end, 
however, students remain significantly below grade normal (T = 8, p < .05); 
on average they are 1.6 years behind the fully sighted norming sample 
for their grade level. In reading, students' scores improved even more 
dramatically from fall to spring (T = 0, p < .01), gaining an average 
of 1.3 years in one school year. This rate of achievement is remarkable, 
since it is well ahead of the normal gain. While the students remain 



u 



CO 



C_3 





H 




2; 








S 




to 




> 




w 


c— 


t— 1 




X 


<D 


u 


i—i 


< 


JO 




« 


CJ 


H 


HH 




s 




w 



M 

C 
•H 
T3 
03 
O 
PS 

CO 
CQ 
H 
O 



I 

60 
C 
■H 

-a 

o 



ce; ?: p., co 



u 

w 
o 

Ph 



O <4H 

P-i Q 



+ 



I I 

00 /-n 

00 

I— I 

+ + 





w 


1 


0) 


a 


V-i 


u 


o 


P-, 


u 




CO 



co 



O o^ 

<r m 



QJ CO 

6 T3 E 

O CO >-i 

•H >-i >-i O 

Q u-i cj 2 



CO 



cr> 

CM 

I 



o^ 



oo 



+ + 



o 



oo r^. 



I <4-4 

GJ 14-1 

rJ -H 

P-. q 



co 



+ 



CO 



+ 



co 



CM 

m 



QJ CO 

E T3 E 

O CO >_i 

t-i M O 

Q M-l O 2 



02 



00 

I 



CM 



+ + 



CM 



CO 





rH 


0) 


CO 


T3 


E 


« 


>-i 


U 


o 


o 


53 



CTv 



o> 



CT« 



eg cr\ < 

Shu 



I <U . 

vO *i— ) O 

r^ .o IS 

CTS 3 

r-l CO 



CO 

I 

CM 



CN 
I 

o 



I 

o 



CM 


CO 


■<r 


rH 


CO 


O 


O 


o 


o 


O 


O 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


CM 


CM 


CM 



-51- 

r^. oo /~+. 

rH rH 

+ + V 

o> CO 00 



<1" vO — i 



+ 



I + 



+ + 



m co <o 

CM CO CO 



rH O rH 

o <r o 



o> 



co 



vD CM 

T + 



co 



o 

CO 






CO rH co 

rH m rH 



CM 

+ 



o 
co 



co 



H- 



co 

CM 



>* 

KT 



+ 



m 
m 



CM 



CM 

I 



CO 



o 

rH 



00 



m 



m 

CO 



m 



oo 

rH 






1^ 



ON 



oo 



oo 



C7\ 
CM 



m 
l 

CTi 



i 

CO 

rH 



00 

I 
CM 



CM 

I 

1^ 



I 



CO 
rH 
CM 



CO 
I 

CO 



rH 
CM 



CO 



CO 

I 



CO 

co 



CM 

+ 



CM 
CM 



o 

CM 
I 



ON 



CTv 



I 



m 

rH 

CM 



CM 

+' 

II 

I X 

CO 

+ 

II 
I X 



CM 



I X 



co 



+ 

ii 

I X 



en 

CO 



c/> 

C 
CO 

a> 
2 



-52- 

about 1.1+ years "behind grade normal in reading, these differences do 
not reach statistical significance (T = 35, p = n.s.). 

These results are of considerable interest in indicating, first of 
all, that students continue to improve; the first year of intervention 
showed gains which basically held through the second full year. However, 
the pattern of gains changed. Initially the greatest improvement was in 
mathematics, and we hypothesized that mathematics scores were running 
significantly ahead of reading scores because computation does not 
involve scanning as reading does. Apparently a second year of ICTS 
experience enabled students to learn visual scanning skills so that the 
19T6-19TT pre-post change in reading was more substantial than the 
mathematics gain and far surpassed the previous year's reading gain. 
By spring 1977, there was no longer any significant difference between 
reading and mathematics achievement scores (T = 2^.5, p = n.s.). We 
now believe that with an aid such as the ICTS, partially sighted students 
are not necessarily destined to lag behind developmental norms on tasks 
that require visual scanning, although it appears that acquiring such a 
skill requires 1 to 1 1/2 years. However, it seems important to obtain 
a third year of achievement data to confirm that the pattern of gains 
we have seen is stable. 

Tables 8 and 8 A, 8B below provide supplementary information about 
academic achievement in lower level subjects, i.e., those whose perfor- 
mance falls below the range of the CTBS and who must be tested with the 
CIRCUS battery (n = k) . These subjects are all members of the younger 
student subgroup at the second generation site. Table 8 gives total 
pre and post test scores for each subject in verbal and quantitative skills 5 



-53- 

Table 8 
KILLIAN SUBJECTS: SUMMARY OF CIRCUS ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES 







Total Verbal 




Total 


Quanta 


.tative 


Subject No. 


Circus 


Pre Post Diff 


Circus 


Pre 


Post 


Diff 


204 


1 


14 14 ±0 


2 


22 


27 


+5 




8 


15 16 +1 


5 


8 


10 


+2 


207 


1 


18 29 +11 


2 


36 


39 


+3 




8 


20 20 ±0 


5 


18 


19 


+1 


208 


1 


23 33 +10 


2 


28 


35 


+7 




8 


14 20 +6 


5 


12 


18 


+6 


212 


1 


22 30 +8 


2 


29 


34 


+5 




8 


17 20 +3 


5 


17 


19 


+2 



-54- 

Table 8A 

KILLIAN SUBJECTS: PRE/POST CIRCUS SCORE COMPARISONS - VERBAL ACHIEVEMENT TESTS 



Age Pre Post 
Subject No. (5/77) 5(9*)/76 5/77 



CIRCUS 1: WHAT WORDS NEAS 
204 7-9 



207 



6-4 



208 



6-8 



212 



6-10 



14 14 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



18 29 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



23 33 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



18 29 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



(pre 2% scored in range; 0% scored below. 

(posi same 

(pre) Appears to lack confidence in receptive vocabulary skills. 

Probably needs further instruction and practice, 
(post) 3ame 



(pre) 17% scored in range; 2% scored below. 

(post) 64% scored in range; 20% scored below. 

(pre) Responded correctly to a number of the receptive vocabulary 

items, but needs more instruction and practice. 
(post) Generally competent in receptive vocabulary skills, but may 

need additional help with verbs and modifiers. 



(pre) 17% scored in range; 11% scored below, 
(post) 64% scored in range; 60% scored below. 
(pre) Responded correctly to a number of the receptive vocabulary 

items, but r.eeds more instruction and practice. 
(post) Generally competent in receptive vocabulary skills. 



(pre) 17% scored in range; 5% scored below. 

(post) 64% scored in range; 39% scored below. 

(pre) Responded correctly to a number of the receptive vocabulary 

items, but probably needs further instruction and practice 

with nouns and verbs. 
(post) Cenerally competent in receptive vocabulary skills. 



CIRCUS S: HOW WORDS WORK 
204 



15 16 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



(pre) 14% scored in range; 1% scored below. 

(post) 14% scored in range; 9% scored below. 

(pre) Responded correctly to most items involving discrimination 
between sentences with different structures; needs further 
instruction and practice in discrimination between verb 
forms and statements Involving prepositions/negation/ 
conjunctions. 

(post) Responded correctly to most items involving discrimination 
between verb forms, but probably needs further instruction 
and practice in discriminating between statements involving 
prep. /neg. /conj . , and between sentences with different 
structures. 



207 



208 



212 



20 20 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



14 20 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



17 20 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



(pre) 

(post) 

(pre) 



(post) 



76% scored in range; 16% scored below 

same 
Generally competent in discriminating between verb forms and 
between statements involving prep. /neg. /conj . , but had diffi- 
culty discriminating between sentences with different 
structures. 

same 



(pre) 14% scored in rr.nge; 1% scored below. 

(post) 76% scored in range; 16% scored below. 

(pre) Needs further instruction and practice in all aspects of 

receptive functional .language assessed by CIRCUS 8. 
(post) See above, pre-sentence report for No. 207. 



(pre) 14% scored in range; 9% scored below. 

(post) 76% scored in ran,;e; 16% scored below. 

(pre) Probably needs further Instruction and practice in all 

aspects of receptive functional language assessed by 

CTRC'JS 8. 
(post) See above pre-senlence report for No. 207. 



Subject 212 entered 9/76. 



-55- 

Table 8B 

KILLIA.N SUBJECTS: PRE/POST CIRCUS SCORE COMPARISONS - QUANTITATIVE ACHIEVEMENT TESTS 



Ag^ Pre Post 
Subject No. (5/77) 5<9*)/76 5/77 



C TRCl'S 2: HOW MUCH ASP ~ .? W SJAM 
204 7-9 



207 



208 



212 



22 27 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



6-4 36 39 

Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



6-8 28 35 

Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



6-10 29 34 

Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



(pre) 15% scored In range; 105! scored below range. 

(post) 64% scored tn range; 19" scored below range. 

(pre) Probably needs further instruction and practice with quan- 
titative concepts especially relational terms. 

(post) Cenerally competent quantitative skills and understanding, 
but may need additional help with relational terms. 



(pre) 64% scored in range; 61% scored below range. 

(post) 17% scored in range; 83% scored below range. 

(pre) Cenerally competent in quantitative skills and under- 
standing. Subject may be approaching operations level of 
development . 

(post) Very competent in quantitative skills and understanding. 



(pre) 64% scored in range; 29% scored below range. 

(post) 64% scored in range; 61% r.cored below range. 

(pre; Responded correctly to many of the quantitative items, 
but needs additional help with counting. 

(post) Generally competent in quantitative skills and understand- 
ing; may be approaching operations level of development. 



(pre) 64% scored in range; 29% scored below range, 
(post) 64% scored in range; 61% scored below range, 
(pre) Generally competent in quantitative skills and 

understanding. 
(post) same 



CIRCUS 5: FIXDIZG LETTZPS AND SUMBEPS 

204 8 10 

Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



207 



208 



212 



18 19 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



12 18 

Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports: 



17 19 
Percentile Ranks: 

Sentence Reports : 



(pre) 18% scored in range; 1% scored below range. 

(post) 58% scored in range; 19% scored below range. 

(pre) Appears to lack competence In recognizing letters and 

numbers. Needs further practice and instruction. 
(post) Probably needs further instruction and practice In 

recognizing letters and numbers. 



(pre) 58% scored in range; 58% scored below range. 

(post) 23% scored in range; 77% scored below range. 

(pre) Generally competent in recognizing letters and numbers. 

(post) Very competent In recognizing letters and numbers. 



(pre) 58% scored In range; 19% scored below range, 
(post) 58% scored in range; 58% scored below range, 
(pre) Generally competent in recognizing letters and numbers, 

but may need additional help with capital letters. 
(post) Generally competent in recognizing letters and numbers. 

(pre) 58% scored in range; 58% scored below range. 

(post) 23% scored in range; 77% 3cored below range. 

(pre) Cenerally competent in recognizing letters and numbers. 

(post) Very competent in recognizing letters and numbers. 



Subject 212 entered 9/76. 



-56- 



along with the pre-to-post change. For purposes of summary analysis, 
scores on the two subtests for each skill are pooled. Wilcoxen 
matched-pairs signed ranks tests indicated that subjects improved 
significantly on both verbal (T = 0, p < .01) and quantitative 
(T = 0, p < .01) assessments. No comparison can be drawn between out- 
comes in the two skill areas, however, since scores do not map on to 
a common grade equivalent scale (all these tests being normed below 
first grade level). These results are similar to the findings for the 
first year at the preacademic level, and suggest stable progress for the 
younger subjects. 

Because the number of preacademic students remains so small as to 
preclude statistical analysis, we have continued the practice of repre- 
senting their performance in detailed descriptive terms. Table 8A 
breaks down the two verbal achievement tests in the following way. 
After the subject identification number and chronological age, total 
scores for CIRCUS 1 pre test and post test are given; then the pre and 
post percentile ranks are noted; finally information is presented about 
the location of the subject's score (the percent of kindergarteners 
scoring below the range of the subject's score in the national norming 
sample), and about the distribution of the subject's abilities (given 
the specific pattern of items passed and failed in the subtest) for both 
the pre and post test . These data are followed by data from CIRCUS 8 
arranged in exactly the same way. Table 8B presents information simi- 
larly organized for the two premathematical subtests. 

In general, the pattern of scores and the interpretive comments 
indicate that younger subjects are improving in most aspects of verbal 
and quantitative performance. Post test percentile scores present a 



-57- 

rather optimistic picture. Considering all l6 post test scores for 
the four tests, only two fell in the bottom ten percent; six scores 
fell in the second decile; one score fell in the fourth decile; and 
seven scores were in the upper 50 percent. This distribution represents 
quite an advance over the first year. Interestingly, the lower decile scores 
came primarily from prereading tests, only two scores from premat hematics 
subtests falling below the 50th percentile. If the results for younger 
subjects parallel those for older ones, we should expect that reading 
skills take longer to develop, but that they will begin to catch up 
with quantitative skills during the last demonstration year. 

Visually Dependent Skills 

In the area of visually dependent skills, it will be recalled, we 
selected visual-motor integration and visual memory (both associative 
and sequential) for assessment. We have evaluated these skills because 
it is reasonable to think they are implicated in information encoding, 
processing and decoding when learning activities are visually mediated. 
Table 9 below represents outcomes for visual motor integration (measured 
by the VMI) and visual sequential memory (measured by that subtest of 
the ITPA) . For purposes of comparison with age developmental scores, 
the table first presents subjects' chronological ages. Next are four 
columns representing ITPA data. The first of these columns gives the 
post test score in year-month equivalents. It is followed by the pretest 
score, and the pre-to-post difference, both of which are also given in 
terms of age-equivalents. The fourth column shows the distance between 
the ITPA age-score and chronological age. VMI data are organized 
similarly in the last four columns of the table. 



-58- 



tu 

H 



CO 

H 

CO 

H 
S3 

W 



W 
Pm 

W 
Q 

I 

CO 



<3 

H 



< CU 
O O 

■d o> • 

fin o 



•H 
P 



0.1 

CJ 
4-1 C ^ 
CO 0) • 

o u o 

Pm CD S 

-^ m v — - 

0> IH 
>-. -H 

CM Q 



r~» 




r> 


01 


■> 


U 




Ph 


Mh 




r^- 


4-1 


r^ 


CO 


- 


o 




P-, 


co 





c_> <u 

CJ 

t) Pi ^ 

Pi 01 • 

m h o 
oi S 

<C M-l v — ' 

Pm ih 
H -H 
H Q 





0) 






a 




4-1 


a 


/ — > 


en 


OI 


• 





u 


O 


P-. 


CU 


X 


**■*, 


IW 


' — / 


0) 


14H 




u 


•H 




Pm 


Q 





v£> 




r>« 


0) 


— 


u 




Pm 


^ 




r-~ 


•u 


r^ 


CO 


- 







Pm 


CO 







O 




23 


r^ 


4-J 


r^ 


a 


1 


a) 


MD 


T~] 


r-^ 


-O 


CT\ 


3 


H 


CO 



<T LO rH 

<r <r rH 
1 1 + 



¥1 



10 

I 



co 
I 





rH 


vO 


CM 




CJ\ 


00 


<N 


<t 


CM 


CN 


<r 


CO 


m 


+ 


1 


1 


1 


1 


I 


1 



CM 
+ 



I 



co 



l 



LO 

I 



+ 1 



1 
o 



ON 
I 



LO 








co 


r^ 


in 





+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 



I + 



m 






m 




rH 


co 


00 


co 


CO 


h>, 


CM 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


1 


1 



i 



I 

CTn 



■K 

l 



I 



1 

St 



CT\ 



CO 

I 
m 



CO 

I 

m 



1 

in 



l 



LO 
I 



<t 
I 

O^ 



l 



o 

1 

m 



ctn 
I 



o 
1 

LO 



I 



I 

CT* 



I 

m 



r- 
I 

CO 



I 



! 



CO 

+ 



O 

+ 1 



co 
+ 



I 

in 



o 
+ 1 



LO 
I 

o 



LO 

I 

o 



o 

+ 1 



% 

LO 

I 

o 



+ 

LO 

I 

o 



CO 

+ 



o 

CO 

+ 



CO 

I 



c-n 
l 

CT> 



I 



O 

CM 

I 



00 

+ 



1 







ON 




<t 


r^ 


CM 


O 


1 


+ 


1 


+ 





rH 


CM 




r^ 


m 


CM 


r^. 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 



m rH 
rH rH 
+ + 



co + 

<d- 00 00 
+ l 



l 



I 



I 
m 



CM 

l 



CM 

I 



LO 

i 

o 

rH 



l 

<t 



04 

I 



co 

I 

r-- 



i 



1 

UO 



I 

LO 



I 



•K 

O 



vr> 



+ 

m 

1 

o 



CM 

O 



CO 

o 



o 



o 

CM 



CO 

o 

CM 



■<!■ 

O 
CM 



o 

CM 



00 
o 

CM 



CM CO 



I 



I 

LO 



as 

+- 

+ 
m 



ON 

rH <C 

a 
a) 


CO 


CM 


O 

rH 


v£> 


<r 


O 


m 


00 


C^ 


CM 




rH 





CO 


00 
1 


l 

CM 
rH 


1 

O 

rH 


1 

O 


1 


CO 
rH 


r-» 


^D 


^O 


CM 


r*N 


VJD 


a> 


00 


rH 



LO 



CO 
0) 

■u 

01 
u 

a, 

•n 
01 
■p 
u 
o 

PL, 
01 

u 



CO 

pi 
o 

> 
H 



o 

•H 
4-1 

a 

OJ 

5-1 
u 
o 
o 



CO 
0) 
4-1 

ctj 
o 

•H 

-a 
pi 

H 



+ 



CO 

01 
u 
o 
o 

CO 

00 

•H 
rH 
•H 
OJ 
O 

CO 
Ol 
4-1 
Ct) 

a 

•rH 

P! 
H 



-59- 



Visually related skill scores were examined using a Wilcoxen 
matched-pairs signed ranks test as before (but here n = lU, since 
subjects below and within the age range of the CTBS are both appropri- 
ately tested with the VMI and ITPA) . An examination of VMI pre-post 
differences reveals that, while a preponderance of the scores are 
positive, the gain is not statistically significant (T = 2U.5, p = n.s.). 
This result contrasts with data for the preceding year, which showed 
significant improvements in visual motor integration. Exactly the 
reverse set of comparisons comes from an examination of ITPA scores. 
The current year's data show a substantial improvement from fall to 
spring (T = 11.5, p < .05); however data for the preceding year do not 
reveal even approximately systematic gains. Over all, by spring 1977, 
subjects continued to score below age norms on the "VMI (t = 7, p < .01) 
while they had closed the gap between them and their age mates on the 
ITPA (T = 26.5, P = n.s.). 

The investigation of visually relevant skill scores, like the achieve- 
ment study, suggests an interesting pattern of results which merits further 
research. We suspect that during the first year of intervention, 
students' visual motor coordination increased as they learned to use the 
ICTS for academic tasks. Because ciphering, unlike reading, requires 
eye-hand integration but not scanning, it is not entirely surprising 
that the first set of short-term outcomes showed gains in both mathematics 
achievement and VMI scores. As students continued to have academic 
experiences mediated by the ICTS, their scanning ability improved; 
at the same time, noticeable gains appeared in reading achievement and 
in visual sequential memory. These latter outcomes represent mastery 



-60- 

of more difficult performance sequences for partially sighted students, 
we think. Exploring intercorrelations among achievement scores and 
visually dependent skill outcomes lends some support to this hypothesis 

SPEARMAN RANK CORRELATIONS (n=10) 





VMI 


ITPA 


READING 


MATHEMATICS 


VMI 


— 


• 52 


.73 


.68 


ITPA 




— 


.90 


• 72 


Reading 









.78 



Mathematics 

(All values are statistically significant; * indicates 
p < .01). 

As the pattern -of correlations suggests, while visual sequential 
memory is associated with mathematics achievement, it is much more 
closely correlated with reading achievement; and "both reading achieve- 
ment and ITPA scores showed most increase during the second year of 
intervention. We suspect this is because both reading and ITPA tasks 
involve visual scanning of a sort that is not required for performing 
mathematics or VMI tasks, as well as visual motor coordination which 
is a necessary condition for performing all of them; but the latter 
sorts of tasks, it should be noted, showed significant improvement 
even during the first year of ICTS-mediated learning. Interestingly, 
despite the established general association of mathematics and read- 
ing achievement (observed in our data as well), for these partially 
sighted students ITPA scores are better predictors of reading outcomes 



-61- 



than are mathematics scores obtained from the same achievement test. 
A third year of evaluation data will permit us to be much more certain 
about the stability and generality of our conclusions. 

The last table in this section, Table 10, presents pre and post 
scores along with pre-to-post changes for younger subjects on 
CIRCUS 12, the test of visual associative memory. Newly entering young 
subjects and older subjects who had not yet reached ceiling on this 
measure were tested (n = 6). A Wilcoxen T test indicated that subjects' 
scores were significantly higher in the spring than in the fall 
(T = 0, p < .01). This result is of interest since the previous year's 
data failed to show significant improvement in CIRCUS 12 scores despite 
a larger n. We had hypothesized that the lack of effect reflected the 
circumstance that scores were too near ceiling rather than lack of 
advance in visual associative memory. This hypothesis seems confirmed 
by the 1976-1977 CIRCUS 12 data, where subjects initially well below 
ceiling showed substantial gains. Comparing these outcomes with 
patterns of results described above for older students, it seems likely 
the younger group is currently mastering skills involved in recognizing 
and reproducing symbols. That is, they are advancing in prequantita- 
tive ability (v. CIRCUS 2, 5) because this skill area does not require 
scanning and sequential memory; rather it relies more on recognition 
memory and visual -motor integration. (incidentally, these younger 
subjects are, on average, 22 1/3 months behind developmental age in 
visual motor integration.) If their experience replicates that of 
older students, we would expect the coming year to show ceiling effects 



-62- 



for simple visual associative memory, and to show improvement in 
visual sequential memory along with improved reading skills. 

Table 10 
CIRCUS 12: SEE AND REMEMBER 





Post Test 


Pre Test 


Difference 


20U 


10 


10 





207 


18 


15 


+3 


208 


13 


13 





211 


16 


9 


+7 


212 


IT 


11 


+6 


2lU 


20 


19 


+l 



Self and Social Attitudes 

Attitudes and skills related to self and social constructs thought 
to mediate academic experience constitute the last set of outcomes 
employed to evaluate the project's impact in the 1976-1977 school 
year. We have assumed that, while the school progress of all children 
is importantly affected "by social and psychological variables, such 
factors might he especially influential for handicapped students. 

For instance, it has been established that the test-taking experi- 
ence itself may contribute to the final test score. We had hypothesized 
that, for the subjects of this study, test-taking has been frequently 
associated with failure and anxiety, associations which would contribute 
negatively to test outcomes. We further supposed that, if the ICTS 
enhances learning, it could lead to changed expectations and changed 
test-taking attitudes, and subsequently to improved test performance. 
Thus the first attitudinal dimensions related to school success that 
we sought to measure were factors affecting test performance. Again we 
used scales adapted from the Stanford Binet Form L-M to rate behavior 



■63- 



during achievement test taking on a pre-post basis. The current year's 
data, like those for 1975-1976, fail to indicate significant change 
on any factor assessed by the rating scales. 

The distressing consistency in outcomes caused us to wonder whether 
they should be explained in terms of problems with the assessment method 
or in terms of real absence of change in attitudinal factors impinging 
on the test taking situation. Regarding the method, a study of judg- 
ments for fall 1975 indicated that the ratings themselves seemed to be 
reliable; that is, for the site II classroom, two teachers, and a Rand 
classroom observer rated ten students highly consistently and without 
apparent halo effects. Teachers commented that while some items seemed 
more applicable than others, the instrument as a whole touched factors 
that importantly described the testing situation. Consequently, we 
regarded the instrument as a fairly good one. However, as we noted 
above, six of the ik items exhibited little variance over subjects. 
Examining the content of these items led us to believe that a history 
of failure experiences resulted in an entrenched attitude toward the 
test-taking situation that would not be easy to alter. For example, 
"sense of intellectual challenge" (item 9) and "willingness to continue" 
(item 10) were uniformly awarded a very low negative rating. Subse- 
quent to the collection of first year outcomes, subjects received an 
additional year of ICTS experience and their test performance improved 
markedly; however, they seemed to face testing with basically unaltered 
attitudes, as if to confirm the above conjecture. Perhaps the situation 
is best illustrated by one subject who gained at a rate of 1.8 grade 
equivalents in both reading and mathematics during year two as measured by 



-64- 



the CTBS. Unmoved by his success, he drew a picture of a tombstone 
bearing his name and the inscription, "Died of testing 1977 — Reincarnated 
when testing was over." Being able to write an inscription that would 
have greatly exceeded his capability at the beginning of the school 
year apparently did not generate the sort of success experience that 
would override a long history of prior academic frustration. Because 
of the apparent stability of scores representing factors affecting 
test performance, and their lack of association with obtained test 
scores, we have decided to discontinue this assessment for year three. 

More encouraging results are provided in the evaluation of general 
self- and school-related attitudes. Such attitudes were assessed by 
means of two self-report instruments, the Self Social Constructs Test 
(SSCT) and the Self Observation Scales (SOS). The SSCT, it should be 
recalled, is a nonverbal instrument requiring subjects to arrange symbols 
representing self and social schemata; it taps six self-social constructs 
(self esteem, social distance from teachers and peers, social interest, 
perceived group inclusion, perceived individuation, and scope of peer 
attachment). Table 11 below provides pre, post, and change scores for 
measures of self esteem and scope of peer attachment, respectively. 
Supplementing the SSCT, the SOS is a verbal forced choice instrument 
requiring subjects to mark 'yes' or 'no' in response to items indexing 
self acceptance, social maturity, school affiliation, and self security. 
Table 12 represents pre, post, and change scores for each of these 
dimensions in the order given here. (Only self acceptance and school 
affiliation are discussed below. The remaining two dimensions showed 
no significant change.) 



-65- 

Table 11 
SELF SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS TEST (SSCT) 







Self- 


■Esteem 


Scope 
Post 


of Pe 
Pre 


er Attachment 




Post 


Pre 


Difference 


Difference 


102 


29 


26 


+3 


17 


19 


-2 


103 


33 


24 


+9 


5 


12 


-7 


104 


31 


16 


+15 


24 


24 





201 


44 


32 


+12 


9 


16 


-7 


203 


29 


30 


-1 


24 


21 


+3 


204 


24 


41 


-17 


3 


2 


+1 


207 


36 


36 





19 


22 


-3 


208 


34 


26 


+8 


24 


24 





210 


34 


31 


+3 


22 


19 


+3 


211 


36 


28 


+8 


24 


6 


+18 


212 


22 


20 


+2 


3 


4 


-1 


213 


40 


31 


+9 


24 


21 


+3 


214 


48 


38 


+10 


19 


9 


+10 


215 


42 


27 


+15 


24 


24 






(range = 8-48) 



(range » 0-24) 






-66- 



Table 12 



SELF OBSERVATION SCALES (SOS)' 



Self Acceptance 
Post Pre Diff 



102 
103 
104 
201 
203 
207 
208 
210 
211 
212 
213 
214 
215 



60 
62 
63 
58 
59 
61 
55 
60 
55 
58 
61 
57 
62 



54 
43 
63 
58 
61 
49 
56 
54 
48 
49 
55 
56 
57 



+6 

+19 





-2 

+12 

-1 

+6 

+7 

+9 

+6 

+1 

+5 



Social Maturity 
Post Pre Diff 



59.3 54.2 



59 
57 
60 
51 
58 
38 
24 
54 
33 
25 
56 
42 
59 



57 
50 
60 
52 
48 
38 
27 
53 
28 
38 
54 
27 
49 



+2 

+7 



-1 

+10 



-3 

+1 

+5 

-13 
+2 

+15 

+10 



School Affiliation 
Post Pre Diff 



47.4 44.4 



60 
43 
59 
24 
39 
32 
51 
43 
36 
38 
38 
50 
50 



56 
30 
59 
30 
60 
46 
47 
27 
36 
43 
41 
56 
51 



+4 

+13 



-6 

-21 

-14 

+4 

+16 



-5 

-3 

-6 

-1 



Self Security 
Post Pre Diff 



43.3 45.4 



58 
66 
67 
70 
55 
52 
36 
56 
51 
47 
63 
53 
65 

56.9 54.3 



54 


+4 


69 


-3 


67 





71 


-1 


50 


+5 


51 


+1 


34 


+2 


58 


-2 


37 


+14 


60 


-13 


54 


+9 


52 


+1 


56 


+9 



L 

T-scores: scales are standardized with x = 50 and s.d. = 10. 



-67- 



Discussions of SSCT and SOS outcomes for the 1975-1976 school 
year, in Chapter II, indicated that no significant overall change was 
obtained for any dimension of either instrument during that year. 
In contrast, the second year's data show that subjects' self concepts 
have become substantially more positive. Using Wilcoxen matched-pairs 
signed-ranks tests we examined the SSCT self esteem scores and the SOS 
self acceptance scores for pre-to-post changes; both yielded significant 
fall-spring increases (T = 15, p < .05 and T = 6, p < .02, respectively), 
Because the two instruments are not highly correlated with one another, 
we think the result is a trustworthy one and give it considerable im- 
portance. It is not surprising that a second year of ICTS experience 
would be required to influence the self concept of visually impaired 
students. However, a third year of data will help determine whether 
this trend is a stable one. Scope of peer attachment (SSCT) and 
school affiliation (SOS) form another pair of dimensions examined for 
pre-post changes. In the 1976-1977 data, as in the previous year, 
both dimensions show basically positive differences which do not reach 
statistical significance. While the distribution of subjects precludes 
between-site comparisons, the classrooms appear to differ in essentially 
the same ways as before. That is, site I subjects (100 series) have 
higher peer attachment scores at pretest (allowing little room 
for favorable change) and show greater school affiliation. We attribute 
these differences to the first generation site's longer duration as an 
ICTS classroom and to the related stability of the subjects as a peer 
group . 



-68- 



Remaining dimensions of the SSCT are not tabled because they yield 
binary data resulting in a limited range of scores with little variance. 
For these reasons we cannot make use of ordinal properties and instead 
have approached the data in terms of binomial tests of the probability 
of positive or negative change over the school year. For the measures 
of social distance from teachers and peers, we first asked what is the 
probability of positive change as opposed to the combined probability 
of negative change or no change; posing the question in this way, we 
could not establish a significant tendency. On the other hand, we also 
asked what is the probability of negative change (increased social 
distance) as opposed either to no change or to decreased social dis- 
tance? Here the binomial test established the significant likelihood 
(p = .05) that social distance would either remain the same or decrease 
from fall to spring. Pursuing a similar analytic strategy with social 
interest, perceived inclusion and perceived individuation, we obtained 
the following results: 

-- There is no significant likelihood that social interest will 
increase or remain stable over the year; however, there is 
a strong probability (p < .01) that it will either remain 
the same or decline. ~ 

For perceived group membership it was equally likely that 
scores would remain the same/increase or remain the same/ 
decrease from fall to spring. 

With respect to perceived individuation, binomial tests sug- 
gested the likelihood (p = .02) that students would either 
remain the same or would perceive themselves as more indi- 
viduated (more different from the majority) as the school year 
progressed. 

The social distance measures, combined with the SSCT and SOS results already 

discussed, suggest that students are feeling better about themselves and are 



-69- 



feeling close to the others in their own classroom. However the assessment 
of social interest, perceived group membership and perceived individuation 
indicate that subjects nevertheless do not feel more integrated into major 
social structures. This latter finding probably reflects subjects' awareness 
of their status as special education students. 

While the evaluations treated in the preceding part of this section have 
to do with attitudes thought to mediate academic success, those to be dis- 
cussed next involve skills which we suppose to be in part visually based 
and to be implicated in the development of interpersonal competence for 
partially sighted students. In spring, 1977, we introduced into the evalua- 
tion the assessment of facial affect encoding and decoding on the assumption 
that social perception and communication are visually based skills that 
mediate interpersonal behavior for visually impaired students in somewhat 
the same way that visual symbolic capability mediates academic activity. If so , 
then to the extent that the ICTS can be used to facilitate affect encoding 
and decoding it may be instrumental in interpersonal as well as cognitive 
development for partially sighted students. 

To measure facial affect recognition, we employed a short version of the 
Inter-Person Perception Test (IPPT), forms AA (adult stimulus faces) and AC 
(child stimulus faces). Adaptation of IPPT photographic materials for ICTS 
administration was accomplished without difficulty. However, administration 
of the full item set (1*0 adult-face and ko child-face items) took too long 
for subjects' comfort and exceeded their attention span as well. Further, 
even with contrast-enhanced photographs, some of the items involved fine 
discrimination which exceeded students' visual capabilities. For these 
reasons, the test was reduced to a total of 20 items, 10 each from the adult 



-70- 



and child forms. Items were selected for inclusion by administering the 
test to normally sighted adults; stimulus faces were chosen when all res- 
pondents scored correctly, with the constraint that sex and ethnicity he 
distributed as in the original item set. Table 13 below presents "data 
collected from ICTS subjects in spring 1977 using the abbreviated IPPT. 

Table 13 



INTER-PERSON PERCEPTION TEST 
Pre Test (Total Range: 0-20) 



Subj ect 

Number 103 10U 107 201 20U 207 208 210 212 213 215 2l6 217 



AA 


3 


5 


3 


8 





3 


5 


6 


3 


6 


7 


3 


7 


AC 


2 


5 


k 


9 


3 


2 


1+ 


2 


h 


1+ 


7 


5 


9 


Total 


5 


10 


7 


17 


3 


5 


9 


8 


7 


10 


lU 


8 


16 



For an idea of how subjects ideally might have fared on the original 
80-item set, scores obtained from each form may be multiplied by k or total 
scores multiplied by 8; these figures may then be compared with test norms. 
For example, obtained averages for AA and AC were k.Q and U.6, respectively, 
in the ICTS population; were this performance representative of the unabridged 
test, the means would have been 19-2 and l8.U, respectively. In comparison, 
test norms for AA and AC are 23-6 and 21.6. Thus, even though total score 
estimates for the ICTS sample are high since items were removed from the 
test on the basis of visual difficulty rather than at random, the projected 
scores still fall short of national norms. On the other hand, it should be 



-71- 



noted that the test norms were derived from adult rather than elementary- 
school-aged respondents. The adult norms suggest that form AA (adult faces) 
might "be easier than form AC (child faces) for an adult population. However 
a Wilcoxen matched pairs signed ranks test established no difference between 
forms for the ICTS subjects (T = 18.5, p = n.s.). The revised IPPT will be 
administered to the ICTS population again in spring 1978, where the question 
of research interest will be whether a curriculum designed to include visual 
attention to facial affect amonp- partially sighted students substantially 
improves outcomes on an affect decoding task. 

In addition to affect decoding, an attempt was made to explore affect 
encoding among the ICTS students at the second generation site. We were 
interested in whether partially sighted students were able to produce con- 
ventional facial signs of six socially important affective dimensions: fear, 
disgust, anger, happiness, sadness, and surprise. Based on the work of 
Ekman and Friesen, an affect expression task was devised in which students 
had an opportunity to make each of these expressions twice, along with two 
neutral faces. The task was administered to 10 site II subjects along with 
matched normally sighted controls (students of the same age [+/- 8 months] 
and sex chosen from regular classrooms). Students were photographed 
(cf. Figs. 1-k below) as each expression was elicited. Photographs are 
now being scored, using multiple criteria from Ekman and Friesen to 
determine whether a student "has the expression"; however, it is apparent 
from the photographs, even without systematic scoring, that partially 
sighted students are seriously behind their fully sighted age-mates in 
affect encoding with respect to the six dimensions explored. 



-72- 



CO 




1 

a 

CO 
H 
Q 














^^ 


o 




O-P- 




r- 


i 




On CM 




i-i 


t-1 




m!> 


1 

CM 


-=t 


C — ■ — 1 


o 


OS 




QJ 


H 


• • 


*tfc 


"-^ 




F-» 


W 


< 


O 




r^i 


§ 


w 


§ 


CO 


C3 


PQ 



c 

u 

CO 

H 
U 



00 
•H 



Eh 




fa 




CO 
IH 

E 



co 




-73- 



CO 







V6Z<- 62*- 


# <5I< 1 II 


E90S W1IJ A13. 


jv.s Mvaq* 


W8Z <rr- 


8Z <r 


i 


HE 






E90S 


f/4 
Wild. A4.3d?.S | 




g 

CO 
H 
P 




-J- r- 

OOsO 
C\J r-i C~- 

=te i i 

« o- I 
O 0\ ON 
Ix, r-4 

1 



t-3 
O 

P=! 
Eh 

O 
O 






4J 



o 
M 
+J 
PI 

o 

1 



oij 
■H 



Ph 

Eh 

W 








w 

CO 

H 

Ph 

Pi 



VIE - 


S— ■' 


I I 


\ 


|p 




ao« 




E90S wH 


woe •» 


1 


OE *i 1 


M 




if 


laJMjtyap.x. 





-74- 



00 








w 
5 




00 
H 

n 




&*? 

VA C~- On 
H Os 
CJ i— I *• 

Eh in 5? 

o n 

w w a 

m <3 ft; 

to O pq 



•u 
C 

a) 

■u 

H 
O 
H 

I 



•H 





00 
M 

PU 



CO 




CO 








Pi 



E-i 
CO 

B 

CO 

I— I 

Q 



-75- 




t < 


KODAK 


SAFETY FILM S063 1 




-^>"25 -»-25A 


. SAFETY FILM 


5063 


•-^| 


'S. - 






-» 24A 


->2 4 






ia r-tA 

r-l Os^O 
OJ i-H I 

=tfc I tr\ 
vo I 

a: c- o\ 

On 
i-i •• 

' W 
En 

O Q 
Pi W 

o 



B 



g 

H 



oom 



e 

Z) 
4-1 
CO 



c 
o 

I 



•H 



=2 




KODAK SAFETY Fl 





p-i 



CO 




-76- 



Four sets of photographs are provided above for illustrative purposes. 
Figures 1 and 2 represent a younger ICTS student and his matched control; 
Figs. 3 and h represent an older ICTS student and his matched control. 
Examination of these and other photographs in the affect encoding task 
supports our hypothesis that partially sighted elementary school students 
are less able to employ conventional facial signs of emotions than are their 
fully sighted peers, a circumstance which might adversely influence social 
competence. We will be interested to determine whether or not the ICTS cur- 
riculum, altered to include communication as well as recognition or affect, 
improves affect encoding outcomes for partially sighted students and decreases 
the difference between them and fully sighted controls. 

Conclusions from the second year 

In general, the assessment of 1976-1977 outcomes suggests that the ICTS 
continues to have a strong positive influence in all areas evaluated. With 
respect to achievement in basic academic skills, test scores indicated signi- 
ficant improvement in both reading and mathematics. But, while gains initiated 
during the first year held throughout the second year of intervention, the 
pattern of gains changed. That is, spring 1976 outcomes showed more marked 
improvement in mathematics than in reading, with students scoring signifi- 
cantly lower in the latter. In contrast, spring 1977 results indicated sub- 
stantially greater improvement in reading than in mathematics so that no 
statistically significant differences remained between achievement scores in 
the two basic skill areas. Apparently a second year of ICTS experience enabled 
students to learn the visual scanning skills requisite for advances in reading 
achievement. In addition to overall progress in reading, a second area of 



-77- 



special attention was the progress of younger preacademic students. As the 
discussion of achievement above noted, preacademic students seemed to he faring 
well. Of the l6 scores obtained from CIRCUS battery subtests for evaluating 
this group, only 9 fell below the 50th percentile on national kindergarten 
norms while 7 were above that mid-way mark. We are inclined, therefore, to 
believe that early exposure to an ICTS is helpful to younger elementary school 
students in minimizing risk of cummulative educational deficits related to 
visual impairment. 

The investigation of two visually-dependent skill areas, visual-motor 
integration and visual memory, yielded an interesting and related pattern of 
results. Subjects' visual-motor integration scores continued to increase but 
the gains did not reach statistical significance. This result contrasts with 
data for the preceding year, when subjects showed significant improvement. 
Exactly the reverse set of comparisons come from an examination of visual 
sequential memory scores. While the 1976 outcomes failed to yield systematic 
advances, the 1977 outcomes manifest substantive gains. It seems likely that 
visual-motor coordination would increase as students learned to use the ICTS 
during the first year of the demonstration. But scanning, as we have seen, 
is more difficult and apparently requires a longer learning period. Thus 
visual sequential memory scores do not evidence significant positive change 
until the second year, during which reading (another scan-dependent activity) 
advances as well. These conjectures were supported by studying the intercor- 
relations among achievement and visually-dependent skill scores. While visual 
sequential memory is associated with mathematics achievement, it is much more 
closely correlated with reading achievement; and both reading achievement 



-78- 



and visual sequential memory scores showed most improvement during the second 
year of intervention. Among the younger students, it should be added, visual 
associative memory scores also shoved strong gains as veil. 

Finally, ve vere most encouraged by significant changes that occurred 
in the self and social attitude domain, since ve believe such parameters are 
not easily altered in this research population. Attitudinal factors affecting 
test performance seem not to be influenced by actual test results, so the 
project vas not able to generate a nev success-expectancy as it had hoped to 
do on the basis of continued successful academic outcomes. Hovever, self- 
and socially-oriented attitude dimensions such as self esteeem and peer 
affiliation exhibited fairly strong positive changes even vhen measured by 
very different methods. With respect to these constructs, the lack of signi- 
ficant correlation betveen methods for assessing them lends more confidence 
in the conclusions. In addition to the evaluation of self and social con- 
structs, the project undertook to explore facial affect encoding and decoding 
among ICTS subjects. While only premeasures are currently available, these 
data suggest that partially sighted students may be handicapped relatively to 
fully sighted peers vith respect to recognition and communication of affect. 
More generally, ve believe that mediators of psychosocial development in the 
partially sighted comprise an area veil vorth further research. 



-79- 

POSTSCRIPT 

In summary, the first two project years suggest that the ICTS has had. 
a strong and apparently stable positive impact on the learning experiences 
of partially sighted elementary school students. In addition, a first look 
at 1977-78 pre-test data leads us to believe these effects will continue to 

the end of the demonstration. Further, classroom observation data (Bikson, 

2 
T. H., 1977) indicate an extremely high level of on-task performance among 

ICTS students. Part of this result is explained by a rather low student- 
teacher ratio; but of equal importance is the fact that these students can 
see their work, can accomplish it with greater ease, and can interact 
visually with one another and with their teacher in ways they could not 
without the ICTS. Finally, the students use the ICTS as a tool not a crutch. 
In other words, they continue to use their residual vision when they are off 
the system; they do not revert to behavior associated with the functionally 
blind. 

If the ICTS experiment is as successful as it now appears, then we need 
to consider the next step — the dissemination of ICTSs to other school dis- 
tricts. A preliminary look at population statistics related to severe visual 
impairment indicates that any community with a minimum of 50,000 inhabitants 
would likely have a sufficient number of partially sighted children between 
the ages of five and eleven years to justify incorporating an ICTS with at 
least h stations in the school district visual handicap program (Genensky, 
S.M., 1978) . Thus, we do not envision any difficulty in locating numerous 
other school districts of appropriate size with sufficient VH program interest 
for employing such a system. 



-80- 



Th e major remaining problem is that of guaranteeing a sufficiently 
large initial purchase of ICTSs to stimulate their production by quality 
manufacturers. The monitors, cameras, lenses, camera stands, videotape 
recorders, and X-Y Platforms used at our two experimental sites are either 
already being manufactured commercially, or could be copied with very little 
effort. However, a production design of the master control unit will require 
a. moderate level of technical sophistication on the part of the manufacturer. 
The master control system is the nerve center of an ICTS; it is used to 
select the image on each of the system's monitors as well as to compose 
that image on each of the system's monitors as well as to compose that image. 
The two ICTSs currently in use were handcrafted at The Rand Corporation. 
However, the design details of the master control units used in these ICTSs 
are available to anyone who has need of them. Consequently, these control 
units could be produced by a private manufacturer given sufficient demand. 

Based on previous experience with new equipment, our belief is that a 
manufacturer would need an initial guarantee of at least ten systems before 
undertaking their production. If that were to occur, then there would be 12 
ICTSs, including the two already in operation, that could serve as models for 
potential user/customers. By potential users we mean other school districts 
whose VH personnel will recognize that an ICTS in their district would aid 
their partially sighted students in leading full productive lives. We recom- 
mend that federal agencies concerned with education for the handicapped under- 
take efforts to fund production and dissemination of at least ten new inter- 
active classroom television systems for the partially sighted. 



-81- 



REFERENCES 



1. Anderson, S., et al, CIRCUS: Comprehensive Assessment in Nursery 

School and Kindergarten. Proceedings of the American Psychological 
Association (Symposium), 1973. Reprinted by Educational Testing 
Service, 1973. 

2. Bikson, T. H. , "Classroom Observation: A Case Study in Obtrusiveness ," 

The Rand Corporation, P-58o4, February 1977. 

3. Buros, 0. K. (ed.), The Seventh Mental Measurements Yearbook, Highland 

Park, N. J., Gryphon Press, 1972. 

h. Campbell, D. , and J. Stanley, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental 
Designs for Research, Chicago, Rand McNally and Company, 1963. 

5. Ekman, P., and W. Fries en, Unmasking the Face, fenglewood Cliffs, N. J., 

Prentice Hall, 1975. 

6. Genensky, S. M. , H. E. Petersen, R. I. Yoshimura, J. B. von der Lieth, 

R. W. Clevett, and H. L. Moshin, Interactive Classroom TV System for 
the Handicapped, The Rand Corporation, R-831-HEW/RC , August 1971. 

7. Genensky, S. M. , H. E. Petersen, R. E. Clewett , and H. L. Moshin, A 

Double X-Y Platform for RANDSIGHT-Type Instruments, The Rand Corpora- 
tion, R-l6l4-HEW, December 197U. 

8. Genensky, S. M. , H. E. Petersen, R. W. Clevett, R. I. Yoshimura, A 

Second Generation Interactive Classroom Television System for the 
Partially Sighted, The Rand Corporation, R-2138-HEW, June 1977. 

9. Genensky, Samuel M. , "Data Concerning the Partially Sighted and the 

Functionally Blind," Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, to 
appear Spring 1978. 

10. Heussenstamm, F. K. , and R. Hoepfner, "Inter-Person Perception Test," 

Monitor, P.O. Box 2337, Hollywood, California, 1969. 

11. Katzenmeyer, W. G. , A. J. Stenner, and A. Jackson, "Strategic Use of 

Random Subsample Replication and A Coefficient Factor Replicability ," 
Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 35, pp. 19-29, 
Spring 1975. 

12. Walker, D. , Socio emotional Measures for Preschool and Kindergarten 

Children, San Francisco, Jossey Bass Publishers, 1973. 



w^^^n 



HV5702 Bikson, Tora K. , C. ] 
B489 Thomas H. Bikson and 

Samuel M. Genensky. 
INTERACTIVE CLASSROOM TELEVISION 
SYSTEMS . . . (1978) 



HV5702 

B489 c « 1 




AMERICAN Fi 

15 i h ' ' 

NEV . . 1. 10011 



Printed in U.S.A. 



5 



T3 
I 



o 

> 



o m 

> > 

I - o 



-o m 
> 

o o 

H r- 
> 

o co 

Z CO 

"O O 

> o 

73 2 



-< < 

CO CO 

CT O 

H 
m co 
o -< 
co 
co 
H 
cz 

O CO 

m 

H 

CO 



CD 
CO 

o